+1

On 2026/09/29 15:52:39 Christopher Bradford wrote:
> +1
> 
> Christopher Bradford
> 
> 
> 
> On Tue, Sep 29, 2026 at 11:18 AM Bernardo Botella <
> [email protected]> wrote:
> 
> > +1
> >
> > *From: *Josh McKenzie <[email protected]>
> > *Date: *Tuesday, 29 September 2026 at 17:01
> > *To: *dev <[email protected]>
> > *Subject: *Re: [VOTE] CEP-66: Zero-copy SSTable splitting
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026, at 9:40 AM, Maxim Muzafarov wrote:
> >
> > +1
> >
> > On Tue, 29 Sept 2026 at 15:12, Abe Ratnofsky <[email protected]> wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > On Tue, Sep 29, 2026, at 6:16 AM, Brandon Williams wrote:
> > > > +1
> > > >
> > > > Kind Regards,
> > > > Brandon
> > > >
> > > > On Mon, Sep 28, 2026 at 3:41 PM Chris Lohfink <[email protected]>
> > wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I'd like to call a vote on CEP-66: Zero-copy SSTable splitting.
> > > >>
> > > >> The proposal splits eligible compressed SSTables by reusing their
> > encoded compression chunks and rebuilding the child components, avoiding a
> > row rewrite. It starts with an opt-in sstablesplit --zero-copy mode for
> > split tool and BIG-format SSTables on Cassandra 7.0/trunk. Reflinks provide
> > an additional optimization where supported; otherwise, Cassandra copies the
> > encoded bytes. Follow-up incremental phases cover Spark support,
> > anticompaction, BTI, 2i, and partial-range zero copy streaming.
> > > >>
> > > >> The discussion covered the new SSTable format, compatibility, reflink
> > complexity, and digest generation. The proposal and discussion are here:
> > > >>
> > > >> Proposal:
> > > >>
> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/spaces/CASSANDRA/pages/451972773/draft+CEP-66+Zero-copy+SSTable+splitting
> > > >>
> > > >> Discussion:
> > > >> https://lists.apache.org/thread/sjqbv0m451kqopms8whymgwbrr2v16tw
> > > >>
> > > >> Please cast your vote in this thread. The vote will remain open for
> > at least 72 hours, longer if needed. Per the CEP process, adoption requires
> > three binding +1 votes and no binding vetoes.
> > > >>
> > > >> Thanks,
> > > >> Chris
> >
> >
> 

Reply via email to