> "All releases by default are expected to have a green test run on
> ci-cassandra Jenkins. In exceptional circumstances (security incidents, data
> loss, etc requiring hotfix), members with binding votes on a release may
> choose to approve a release with known failing tests."
+1 with amendmen
Hi Paulo!
Thanks for organizing this. I would like to propose CASSANDRA-17381
[1] which will implement/verify BoundedReadCompactionStrategy for this
year's GSOC and I can mentor (although I think we may need a
co-mentor?). Please let me know if there is any further context I need
to provide or jir
Woo
Congratulations to the new committers and I am so excited to see the
project recognizing these contributions!
-Joey
On Tue, Feb 15, 2022 at 10:13 AM Benjamin Lerer wrote:
>
> The PMC members are pleased to announce that Anthony Grasso, Erick Ramirez
> and Lorina Poland have accepted the i
+1 nb
Really excited for this, Thank you Branimir!
-Joey
On Wed, Feb 16, 2022 at 12:58 AM Branimir Lambov wrote:
>
> Hi everyone,
>
> I'd like to propose CEP-19 for approval.
>
> Proposal:
> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/CEP-19%3A+Trie+memtable+implementation
> Discussi
Thank you for all your work and dedication Nate, it has been greatly
appreciated.
Congratulations Mick, we are in good hands with you as chair!
-Joey
On Mon, Jul 11, 2022 at 5:54 AM Paulo Motta wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I wanted to announce on behalf of the Apache Cassandra Project Management
> Commi
I'm surprised we released 4.0 without changing the default to G1 given
that many Cassandra deployments have changed the project's default
because it is incorrect. I know that 7486 broke a user 7 years ago,
but I think we have had a ton of testing since then in the community
to build our confidence.
It seems like this is a choice most users might not know how to make?
On Thu, Nov 17, 2022 at 7:06 AM Josh McKenzie wrote:
>
> Have we ever discussed including multiple profiles that are simple to swap
> between and documented for their tested / intended use cases?
>
> Then the burden of having
Hi everyone!
I am curious what Dinesh's perspective is but I think the specific
enumerated scope in CEP-1 isn't super critical to be honest. That CEP
successfully (imo) built consensus that the community wants a separate
management process, and that sidecar both exists today and has useful
functio
Definitely like this in C* itself. We only changed our proposal to putting
repair scheduling in the sidecar before because trunk was frozen for the
foreseeable future at that time. With trunk unfrozen and development on the
main process going at a fast pace I think it makes way more sense to
integr
+1
On Fri, Nov 8, 2024 at 10:42 PM Jordan West wrote:
> +1
>
> On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 11:15 Chris Lohfink wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Wed, Nov 6, 2024 at 11:10 AM Francisco Guerrero
>> wrote:
>>
>>> +1 (nb)
>>>
>>> On 2024/11/06 14:07:47 "Tolbert, Andy" wrote:
>>> > +1 (nb)
>>> >
>>> > On Tue, Nov
/CK23JSY2K/p173177560319
On Sat, Nov 16, 2024 at 10:20 AM Joseph Lynch wrote:
> Oh I didn't agree we needed a new CEP, I thought we were agreeing on
> focusing on releasing the sidecar as is. CEP-1 was already voted on, we
> built consensus on the controversial part (having functionality ou
gt; > > > > > one. It achieves the same end goal and we can create new CEPs
> for the scope
> > > > > > that is deferred.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Dinesh
> > > > > >
> > > > > > On Mon, Oct 14, 2024 at 4:51 PM Pat
Wahoo! Congratulations Patrick!
-Joey
On Wed, Jan 22, 2025 at 11:06 AM Jordan West wrote:
> The PMC's members are pleased to announce that Patrick McFadin has accepted
> an invitation to become a PMC member.
>
> Thanks a lot, Patrick, for everything you have done for the project all
> these yea
I feel like the "T-1" approach only really makes sense if there are
additional time guarantees with features that have left experimental
status. I agree it is good to shift our versions to the left (folks already
treated the concatenation of major.minor as our major), but I agree
with Benedict and
On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 3:12 PM Miklosovic, Stefan via dev <
dev@cassandra.apache.org> wrote:
> Seeing this thread where we discuss about deprecations, I use this for
> asking if there is some action to take when looking into (1) I conducted a
> small research for some time ago.
>
>
>
> There are
On Mon, Apr 21, 2025 at 9:20 AM Josh McKenzie wrote:
> Honestly, excepting thrift support I can't remember something we removed
> from the system in this way so a lot of this is perhaps premature process
> optimization.
>
That is definitely fair, as long as we don't go deprecating things after a
Congratulations David!
-Joey
On Mon, Apr 28, 2025 at 3:09 PM Jon Haddad wrote:
> Hey everyone!
>
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Cassandra is delighted
> to announce that David Capwell has joined the PMC!
>
> Thank you David for all your contributions to the project over the
I'm unclear if Josh/Ekaterina/Benedict's statements are part of the vote
amending our project governance. If consensus is required for breaking
changes with a strong preference for not breaking I am +1, but the original
text of Josh's proposal is merely "We use a deprecate-then-remove strategy
for
+1 given "Have it for *at least* 1 MAJOR in deprecated status
(deprecate-then-remove)"
How does that sit with you Joey?
>
Great! Really appreciate the clarification!
-Joey
Congratulations Jaydeep!
On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 9:19 AM Bernardo Botella <
conta...@bernardobotella.com> wrote:
> More great news!
>
> Congratulations Jaydeep!
>
> On Apr 30, 2025, at 6:11 AM, Jon Haddad wrote:
>
> Congrats!!
>
>
>
> On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 6:07 AM Mick Semb Wever wrote:
>
>>
I also feel like this is what docker is for? It should be relatively
straightforward to start from a golang Dockerfile, add the files you need,
generate the docs and copy the result back out?
-Joey
On Wed, Apr 30, 2025 at 10:14 AM Chris Lohfink wrote:
> Cassandra's rube goldberg build system is
On Fri, May 2, 2025 at 6:46 AM Mick Semb Wever wrote:
> But layering in the ability to do it with docker is opposed to requiring
> the use of docker. i.e. I don't think we should make docker mandatory
> inside `ant check`.
>
I think if you don't have docker it could be reasonable not to build t
Isn't the JDK we build with when publishing to maven somewhat of a public
interface due to cassandra-all library usage? I agree that we probably just
need to clearly document what JVMs we test a release on which is a good
signal for what we think will work at runtime (and this may be a much newer
J
r (my user table), some stuff you want to LRU (infrequently
> accessed nightly jobs), and some stuff you want to tier off (user
> engagement).
>
> What it really boils down to are these properties:
>
> * Do we upload to object store when writing the SSTable?
> * Do we upload after a
Great discussion - I agree strongly with Jon's points, giving operators
this option will make many operator's lives easier. Even if you still have
to have 100% disk space to meet performance requirements, that's still much
more efficient than you can run C* with just disks (as you need to leave
hea
+1
On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 1:28 PM Patrick McFadin wrote:
> +1
>
> On Mon, Mar 10, 2025 at 9:28 AM Dinesh Joshi wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> On Sun, Mar 9, 2025 at 5:18 AM Mick Semb Wever wrote:
>>
>>> Please vote on the acceptance of the Cassandra Cluster Manager (CCM)
>>> and its IP Clearance:
>>> h
Congratulations Ekaterina - very well deserved!
On Tue, Mar 4, 2025 at 3:25 PM Paulo Motta wrote:
> Aloha,
>
> The Project Management Committee (PMC) for Apache Cassandra is delighted
> to announce that Ekaterina Dimitrova has joined the PMC!
>
> Thanks a lot, Ekaterina, for everything you have
101 - 127 of 127 matches
Mail list logo
