Re: Proposal: release 2.2 (based on current trunk) before 3.0 (based on 8099)
On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Robert Stupp wrote: > Instead of labeling it 2.2, I’d like to propose to label it 3.0 (so > basically just move 8099 to 3.1). > In the end it’s ”only a label”. But there are a lot of new user-facing > features in it that justifies a major release. > +1 on labeling the proposed 2.2 as 3.0 and moving (8099 to 3.1) 1. Tons of new features that feel more than just a 2.2 2. The majority of features planned for 3.0 are actually ready for this version 3. in order to avoid compatiblity questions (and version compatibility matrices), the drivers developed by DataStax have followed the Cassandra versions so far. The Python and C# drivers are already at 2.5 as they added some major features. Renaming the proposed 2.2 as 3.0 would allow us to continue to use this versioning policy until all drivers are supporting the latest Cassandra version and continue to not require a user to check a compatibility matrix. -- Bests, Alex Popescu | @al3xandru Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax
Re: Proposal: release 2.2 (based on current trunk) before 3.0 (based on 8099)
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 1:32 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > The drivers, actually, aren’t ready at all for 3.0 with 8099, because 6717 > will be pushed shortly after 8099, and break things. Apologies, I didn't mean they are ready today. Version-wise, renaming this proposed 2.2 to 3.0 would allow us to maintain a versioning policy that made things quite simple for users: Cassandra version == driver version. -- Bests, Alex Popescu | @al3xandru Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax
Re: Proposal: release 2.2 (based on current trunk) before 3.0 (based on 8099)
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 1:41 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko wrote: > 3.0 to 2.2? Python and C# have already used 2.5 (I wouldn't have brought this up if I had other options). -- Bests, Alex Popescu | @al3xandru Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax
Re: Proposal: release 2.2 (based on current trunk) before 3.0 (based on 8099)
Another option could be 2.1 -> 2.5* -> 3.0 This would still emphasize the major new features and changes in both versions. (*) unfortunately 2.5 would not help for drivers, so labeling 2.6 would get my +1. On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 2:09 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > I do like 2.2 and 3.0 over 3.0 and 3.1 because going from 2.x to 3.x > signals that 8099 really is a big change. > > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Alex Popescu wrote: > > > On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Robert Stupp wrote: > > > > > Instead of labeling it 2.2, I’d like to propose to label it 3.0 (so > > > basically just move 8099 to 3.1). > > > In the end it’s ”only a label”. But there are a lot of new user-facing > > > features in it that justifies a major release. > > > > > > > +1 on labeling the proposed 2.2 as 3.0 and moving (8099 to 3.1) > > > > 1. Tons of new features that feel more than just a 2.2 > > 2. The majority of features planned for 3.0 are actually ready for this > > version > > 3. in order to avoid compatiblity questions (and version compatibility > > matrices), the drivers developed by DataStax have > > followed the Cassandra versions so far. The Python and C# drivers are > > already at 2.5 as they added some major features. > > > >Renaming the proposed 2.2 as 3.0 would allow us to continue to use > this > > versioning policy until all drivers are supporting > >the latest Cassandra version and continue to not require a user to > check > > a compatibility matrix. > > > > > > -- > > Bests, > > > > Alex Popescu | @al3xandru > > Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax > > > > > > -- > Jonathan Ellis > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com > @spyced > -- Bests, Alex Popescu | @al3xandru Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax
Re: Proposal: release 2.2 (based on current trunk) before 3.0 (based on 8099)
On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 2:16 PM, Jonathan Haddad wrote: > I'm not sure if the complications surrounding the versioning of the drivers > should be factored into the releases of Cassandra. I agree. If we could come up with a versioning scheme that would also work for drivers, that would be the ideal case as it will prove quite helpful to our users. > I think that 3.0 > signals a massive change and calling the release containing 8099 a .1 would > be drastically underplaying how big of a release it is - from the > perspective of the end user it would be a disservice. > > I see. My last suggestion could work though as it signals both releases having significant impact. > > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 2:09 PM Jonathan Ellis wrote: > > > I do like 2.2 and 3.0 over 3.0 and 3.1 because going from 2.x to 3.x > > signals that 8099 really is a big change. > > > > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 3:28 PM, Alex Popescu > wrote: > > > > > On Sun, May 10, 2015 at 2:14 PM, Robert Stupp wrote: > > > > > > > Instead of labeling it 2.2, I’d like to propose to label it 3.0 (so > > > > basically just move 8099 to 3.1). > > > > In the end it’s ”only a label”. But there are a lot of new > user-facing > > > > features in it that justifies a major release. > > > > > > > > > > +1 on labeling the proposed 2.2 as 3.0 and moving (8099 to 3.1) > > > > > > 1. Tons of new features that feel more than just a 2.2 > > > 2. The majority of features planned for 3.0 are actually ready for this > > > version > > > 3. in order to avoid compatiblity questions (and version compatibility > > > matrices), the drivers developed by DataStax have > > > followed the Cassandra versions so far. The Python and C# drivers > are > > > already at 2.5 as they added some major features. > > > > > >Renaming the proposed 2.2 as 3.0 would allow us to continue to use > > this > > > versioning policy until all drivers are supporting > > >the latest Cassandra version and continue to not require a user to > > check > > > a compatibility matrix. > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Bests, > > > > > > Alex Popescu | @al3xandru > > > Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax > > > > > > > > > > > -- > > Jonathan Ellis > > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra > > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com > > @spyced > > > -- Bests, Alex Popescu | @al3xandru Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax
Re: Getting datacenter from InetSocketAddress
1. This question is better asked on the Java driver mailing list 2. You can use: cluster.getMetadata().getAllHosts() and the Host class contains the details you are looking for. On Wed, May 27, 2015 at 9:49 AM, Cyril Scetbon wrote: > Hi, > > I have a Cluster instance and I'd like to get all hosts from it to check > in which datacenter they are. Is there a way to do that ? I tried by > accessing the cluster metadata and using allHosts, but this function is > only private :( > Actually, I have a cluster instance and an ip address and I'd like to get > the datacenter corresponding to this host. Is there an easy way to do it > with the datastax java driver ? > > Thanks -- Bests, Alex Popescu | @al3xandru Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax
Re: ODBC Driver Connection failure on Windows for connecting to the Cassandra
What JDBC and ODBC drivers are you using? On Friday, April 15, 2016, Maeng, Paul wrote: > To Whom It May Concerns: > I have a few days to spend to identify and resolve the ODBC Connection > issue on ODBC Data Source Admistarator’s configuration? > Recently, we installed the 3.0 version on our dev server and validated the > JDBC connection(port 9160/9042) successfully. However, after the ODBC > driver installed > In my windows –7 and create the User DSN on the administrator based on the > instruction using the port 9042 as default. > Once “Test” button, we connected to the cassandra on our sever and the > connection shows “established” on net state. However, the connection never > returned back to > The odbc data source administrator to show “Connection successfully” or > ‘Failed” on the menu as expected. Until forced, the connection shows > ‘established” in the dev sever under the Cassandra. > > I am trying to understand the test connection supposed to be returned back > to the “Test” on the configuration menu on the ODBC Administrator or not. > > I appreciate if you could give an answer. > > Thank you, > Paul Maeng > (615) 686-5654 > -- Bests, Alex Popescu | @al3xandru Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax <http://cassandrasummit.org/Email_Signature> » DataStax Enterprise - the database for cloud applications. «
Re: Jira down, again?
I've been trying to get to a ticket for the last 2h and I only get service unavailable :-( On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 10:26 AM, Michael Kjellman < mkjell...@internalcircle.com> wrote: > and, it's down again. :( > > > On Jun 14, 2016, at 4:48 AM, Dave Brosius wrote: > > > > They are aware of these things > > > > https://twitter.com/infrabot <https://twitter.com/infrabot> > > > > On 06/14/2016 05:28 AM, Giampaolo Trapasso wrote: > >> Hi to all, > >> at the moment is the same for me. Is there a way to notify to someone > this > >> situation? > >> > >> Giampaolo > >> > >> 2016-06-13 23:27 GMT+02:00 Mahdi Mohammadi : > >> > >>> And when it is not down, it is very slow for me. > >>> > >>> Do others have the same experience? > >>> > >>> Best Regards > >>> > >>> On Tue, Jun 14, 2016 at 4:19 AM, Brandon Williams > >>> wrote: > >>> > >>>> Everyone. > >>>> > >>>> On Mon, Jun 13, 2016 at 3:18 PM, Michael Kjellman < > >>>> mkjell...@internalcircle.com> wrote: > >>>> > >>>>> Seems like Apache Jira is 100% down, again, for like the 500th time > in > >>>> the > >>>>> last 2 months. Just me or everyone? > > > > -- Bests, Alex Popescu | @al3xandru Sen. Product Manager @ DataStax <http://cassandrasummit.org/Email_Signature> » DataStax Enterprise - the database for cloud applications. «
