Re: Pushing CASSANDRA-16262 out of 4.0-rc

FWIW, +1 to Alex's proposal, and I'll try to contribute around CASSANDRA-16262. On Wed, Feb 17, 2021 at 4:20 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote: > Based on the discussions I had with Alex, it is clear that Harry has been a > really valuable tool to find some issues that we would have otherwise > missed. >

Re: Pushing CASSANDRA-16262 out of 4.0-rc

Based on the discussions I had with Alex, it is clear that Harry has been a really valuable tool to find some issues that we would have otherwise missed. Part of the problem with CASSANDRA-16262 was in my opinion that we lacked experience with the tool itself and did not know where to start. Alex n

Re: Pushing CASSANDRA-16262 out of 4.0-rc

In the absence of a fuzz testing tool I would probably support excluding this ticket from GA, but speaking from recent experience it feels to me that fixing bugs is blocking us from further fuzz testing more than fuzz testing is blocking us from releases. In other words, you run a fuzz test for a r

Re: Pushing CASSANDRA-16262 out of 4.0-rc

It seems to me that CASSANDRA-16180 , CASSANDRA-16262 and CASSANDRA-16181 already highly improve the test coverage on distributed re

Pushing CASSANDRA-16262 out of 4.0-rc

Hey everyone, I wanted to have a quick conversation about CASSANDRA-16262 . As I mentioned in the Jira