x27;ve started here. That
discussion will gauge receptivity and whether to proceed by acclamation; or whether
the proposal is significant enough in scope to warrant a CEP doc and vote thread [3].
Cheers, – Scott [1] http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA [2]
http://issues.apache.org/jira/b
production database process.The reason people care about object is that it’s 70%+ cheaper than flash - and 90%+ cheaper if the software querying it isn’t always running, too.– Scott—MobileOn Mar 4, 2025, at 12:29 PM, Štefan Miklošovič wrote:Jeff,when it comes to snapshots, there was already discussion in
I’d love to see this implemented — where “this” is a proxy for some notion of support for remote object storage, perhaps usable by compaction strategies like TWCS to migrate data older than a threshold from a local filesystem to remote object.It’s not an area where I can currently dedicate enginee
I’m also supportive of proceeding to merge.The CEP contributors have worked incredibly hard on the protocol and feature and I’m proud it’s reached this point.If the concern is trunk stability - we have been deploying trunk-derived builds for over six months and will continue to do so post-merge. Ma
No strong opinion on particular choice of metrics library.My primary feedback is that if we swap metrics implementations and the new values are *different*, we can anticipate broad user confusion/interest.In particular if latency stats are reported higher post-upgrade, we should expect users to int
+1 On Mar 18, 2025, at 7:46 AM, Paulo Motta wrote: . PMC
members, please check carefully the IP Clearance requirements before voting. The vote
will be open for 72 hours (or longer). Votes by PMC members are considered binding. A
vote passes if there are at least three binding +1s and no -1's.
used in user schemas. If the proposal introduces this as a reserved word that would require it to be quoted if used in table or column names, this will create incompatibility for existing user queries on upgrade.Otherwise, ignore me. :)Thanks,– Scott–––MobileOn Apr 10, 2025, at 7:47 AM, Jon Haddad
+1 Important we get a release out that resolves CASSANDRA-20449: Serialization can lose
complex deletions in a mutation with multiple collections in a row On Apr 8, 2025, at 4:07
AM, Brandon Williams wrote: +1 On Mon, Apr 7, 2025 at
7:35 AM Brandon Williams wrote: Proposing the test build
of
+1 To the point on breaking changes and deprecations, I'd like to maintain a *very* high bar for user
API-breaking changes – much higher than "our rules allow us to". Any time we break users,
the project loses release uptake and creates friction for the community. – Scott On Apr
+1 6.0- Scott—MobileOn Apr 10, 2025, at 1:34 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:+1 for 6.0 for TCM/Accord changes, making it easier to make a case to upgrade dependencies like the Java/Python versions.On Apr 10, 2025, at 3:24 PM, Bernardo Botella wrote:+1 on 6.0On Apr 10, 2025, at 1:07 PM, Josh McKenzie
I propose we:- Exclude JDK support from the subject of this vote.- And start a separate [DISCUSS] and [VOTE] thread to cover JDK/JRE lifecycle.Josh’s proposal that we are voting on does not address JDK versioning, and I don’t interpret the text of the proposal as a referendum on it. Many / most did
Hi Runtian, thanks for reaching out. Your username should now have permission to
create new wiki pages for CEPs in ASF Confluence. Cheers, – Scott On Apr 29, 2025, at
9:04 AM, Runtian Liu wrote: Hi, Could you please grant me
permission to create a new CEP? My ID is curlylrt. Thank you! Thanks
My thinking is most closely aligned with Blake and Benedict’s views here.For the specific refactor in question, I support adoption of the language feature for new code or to cut existing code over to the new syntax as changes are made to the respective areas of the codebase. But I don’t support a s
201 - 213 of 213 matches
Mail list logo
