I think Ed's just using gossip 2.0 as a hypothetical example. His point is that
we should only commit things when we have a high degree of confidence that they
work correctly, not with the expectation that they don't.
On November 19, 2016 at 10:52:38 AM, Michael Kjellman
(mkjell...@internalcir
Jason has asked for review and feedback many times. Maybe be constructive and
review his code instead of just complaining (once again)?
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 19, 2016, at 1:49 PM, Edward Capriolo wrote:
>
> I would say start with a mindset like 'people will run this in production'
> not
I would say start with a mindset like 'people will run this in production'
not like 'why would you expect this to work'.
Now how does this logic effect feature develement? Maybe use gossip 2.0 as
an example.
I will play my given debby downer role. I could imagine 1 or 2 dtests and
the logic of 'd
I’d like to suggest an option similar to what Jeremiah described and that
would basically follow the Ubuntu LTS release model [1], but with shorter
time periods. The idea would be to do a stable release every 6 months with
1 year bug fixing support. At the same time, every third stable release
will
Any proposal to solve the problem you describe?
--
Jeff Jirsa
> On Nov 19, 2016, at 8:50 AM, Edward Capriolo wrote:
>
> This is especially relevant if people wish to focus on removing things.
>
> For example, gossip 2.0 sounds great, but seems geared toward huge clusters
> which is not likel
Hi Sanal,
>do we have metadata inside Mutation object to decode whether the CQL was an
INSERT or UPDATE operation?
I'm not sure it's possible to distinguish them - both of them just add data to
SSTable.
Best regards, Vladimir Yudovin,
Winguzone - Hosted Cloud Cassandra
Launch your clus
It has nothing to do with my positivity. It is not only my sentiment many
people who operate cassandra will repeate the notion that they dont like
that releases are not stable for 6 minors.
There is this concept where people accept deviation from the norm.
Of course the test dont all pass.
Of cou
Honest question: are you *ever* positive Ed?
Maybe give it a shot once in a while. It will be good for your mental health.
Sent from my iPhone
> On Nov 19, 2016, at 11:50 AM, Edward Capriolo wrote:
>
> This is especially relevant if people wish to focus on removing things.
>
> For example,
This is especially relevant if people wish to focus on removing things.
For example, gossip 2.0 sounds great, but seems geared toward huge clusters
which is not likely a majority of users. For those with a 20 node cluster
are the indirect benefits woth it?
Also there seems to be a first push to r
On Friday, November 18, 2016, Jeff Jirsa wrote:
> We should assume that we’re ditching tick/tock. I’ll post a thread on
> 4.0-and-beyond here in a few minutes.
>
> The advantage of a prod release every 6 months is fewer incentive to push
> unfinished work into a release.
> The disadvantage of a p
Hi,
I do like Sylvain's proposal too.
And, from a user perspective, I agree with Kurt that having (at least) 2
"bug fixing only" branches instead of 1 would be great.
De :kurt Greaves
A : dev@cassandra.apache.org,
Date : 19/11/2016 07:42
Objet : Re: Proposals for releases - 4.0 and
11 matches
Mail list logo
