Just to add to Mick's point, we (Instaclustr) have also been running and recommending 3.11.x by default. It's currently by far the most common version in our managed fleet and our last 3.0.x cluster will likely be upgraded shortly. 3.11.x is also our recommendation for consulting and support customers. I'd therefore support Mick's recommendation (really based on our experience with and confidence in 3.11.x rather than being able to point to specific issues off hand) that 2.*->3.11.x->4.0 is the preferred upgrade path. We will do testing on 3.11.x to 4.0 upgrade but I can't see us doing any work on 3.0 to 4.0.
Cheers Ben --- *Ben Slater**Chief Product Officer* <https://www.instaclustr.com/platform/> <https://www.facebook.com/instaclustr> <https://twitter.com/instaclustr> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/instaclustr> Read our latest technical blog posts here <https://www.instaclustr.com/blog/>. This email has been sent on behalf of Instaclustr Pty. Limited (Australia) and Instaclustr Inc (USA). This email and any attachments may contain confidential and legally privileged information. If you are not the intended recipient, do not copy or disclose its content, but please reply to this email immediately and highlight the error to the sender and then immediately delete the message. On Sun, 11 Oct 2020 at 06:42, Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org> wrote: > > "3.11 performs close to parity with 2.1/2.2. 3.0 does not. If we > recommend > > people upgrade from 2.1 -> 3.0 -> 4.0, we are asking them to have a > cluster > > in a regressed performance state for potentially months as they execute > > their upgrade." > > > > Did I get anything wrong here Mick? ^ > > > > > That's correct Josh. > > From tickets like those listed, and from experience, we recommend folk > avoid 3.0 altogether. This has only been made more evident by witnessing > the benefits from 3.0 → 3.11 upgrades. > > My recommendation remains 2.*→3.11→4.0. And I don't believe I'm alone. > Though if a user was already on 3.0, then I would (of course) recommend an > upgrade directly to 4.0. > > I feel like I'm just splitting straws at this point, since we have accepted > (folk willing to help with) both paths to 4.0, and I can't see how we stop > recommending 2.*→3.11 upgrades. >
