While the protocol's being changed, does it make sense to add in
CASSANDRA-13292 as well? Or at least, some sort of ability to choose a hash
algorithm?
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:32 PM Dinesh Joshi wrote:
> +1
>
> Dinesh
>
> > On Oct 9, 2019, at 12:41 PM, Joshua McKenzie
> wrote:
> >
> >>
> >> ea
+1
Dinesh
> On Oct 9, 2019, at 12:41 PM, Joshua McKenzie wrote:
>
>>
>> each one of them is extremely low risk, which means that any validation
>> effort that has already happened won't have to be re-done
>
> +1
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:46 PM Jon Haddad wrote:
>
>> Seems reasonable, es
>
> each one of them is extremely low risk, which means that any validation
> effort that has already happened won't have to be re-done
+1
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 1:46 PM Jon Haddad wrote:
> Seems reasonable, especially since we're in alpha mode.
>
> On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:28 AM Aleksey Yeshc
Seems reasonable, especially since we're in alpha mode.
On Wed, Oct 9, 2019 at 10:28 AM Aleksey Yeshchenko
wrote:
> +1; in particular since the protocol itself is still in beta
>
> > On 9 Oct 2019, at 17:26, Oleksandr Petrov
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi,
> >
> > During NGCC/ACNA19 we've had quite a few
+1; in particular since the protocol itself is still in beta
> On 9 Oct 2019, at 17:26, Oleksandr Petrov wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> During NGCC/ACNA19 we've had quite a few conversations around the 4.0
> release. Many (minor) features and changes suggested during that time are
> possible to implement i
+1
On 09/10/2019, 17:50, "Oleksandr Petrov" wrote:
Hi,
During NGCC/ACNA19 we've had quite a few conversations around the 4.0
release. Many (minor) features and changes suggested during that time are
possible to implement in 4.next without any problem. However, some changes
Hi,
During NGCC/ACNA19 we've had quite a few conversations around the 4.0
release. Many (minor) features and changes suggested during that time are
possible to implement in 4.next without any problem. However, some changes
that seem to be very important for the community, which got mentioned in
se
