As I follow up, I suppose I'm only advocating for a fix to the odd
releases. Sadly, Tick Tock versioning is misleading.
If tick tock were to continue (and I'm very much against how it currently
works) the whole even-features odd-fixes thing needs to stop ASAP, all it
does it confuse people.
The follow up to 3.4 (3.5) should have been 3.4.1, following semver, so
people know it's bug fixes only to 3.4.
Jon
On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 10:37 PM Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com> wrote:
> In this particular case, I'd say adding a bug fix release for every
> version that's affected would be the right thing. The issue is so easily
> reproducible and will likely result in massive data loss for anyone on 3.X
> WHERE X < 6 and uses the "date" type.
>
> This is how easy it is to reproduce:
>
> 1. Start Cassandra 3.5
> 2. create KEYSPACE test WITH replication = {'class': 'SimpleStrategy',
> 'replication_factor': 1};
> 3. use test;
> 4. create table fail (id int primary key, d date);
> 5. delete d from fail where id = 1;
> 6. Stop Cassandra
> 7. Start Cassandra
>
> You will get this, and startup will fail:
>
> ERROR 05:32:09 Exiting due to error while processing commit log during
> initialization.
> org.apache.cassandra.db.commitlog.CommitLogReplayer$CommitLogReplayException:
> Unexpected error deserializing mutation; saved to
> /var/folders/0l/g2p6cnyd5kx_1wkl83nd3y4r0000gn/T/mutation6313332720566971713dat.
> This may be caused by replaying a mutation against a table with the same
> name but incompatible schema. Exception follows:
> org.apache.cassandra.serializers.MarshalException: Expected 4 byte long for
> date (0)
>
> I mean.. come on. It's an easy fix. It cleanly merges against 3.5 (and
> probably the other releases) and requires very little investment from
> anyone.
>
>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 9:40 PM Jeff Jirsa <jeff.ji...@crowdstrike.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We did 3.1.1 and 3.2.1, so there’s SOME precedent for emergency fixes,
>> but we certainly didn’t/won’t go back and cut new releases from every
>> branch for every critical bug in future releases, so I think we need to
>> draw the line somewhere. If it’s fixed in 3.7 and 3.0.x (x >= 6), it seems
>> like you’ve got options (either stay on the tick and go up to 3.7, or bail
>> down to 3.0.x)
>>
>> Perhaps, though, this highlights the fact that tick/tock may not be the
>> best option long term. We’ve tried it for a year, perhaps we should instead
>> discuss whether or not it should continue, or if there’s another process
>> that gives us a better way to get useful patches into versions people are
>> willing to run in production.
>>
>>
>>
>> On 9/14/16, 8:55 PM, "Jonathan Haddad" <j...@jonhaddad.com> wrote:
>>
>> >Common sense is what prevents someone from upgrading to yet another
>> >completely unknown version with new features which have probably broken
>> >even more stuff that nobody is aware of. The folks I'm helping right
>> >deployed 3.5 when they got started because
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=http-3A__cassandra.apache.org&d=DQIBaQ&c=08AGY6txKsvMOP6lYkHQpPMRA1U6kqhAwGa8-0QCg3M&r=yfYEBHVkX6l0zImlOIBID0gmhluYPD5Jje-3CtaT3ow&m=MZ9nLcNNhQZkuXyH0NBbP1kSEE2M-SYgyVqZ88IJcXY&s=pLP3udocOcAG6k_sAb9p8tcAhtOhpFm6JB7owGhPQEs&e=
>> suggests
>> >it's acceptable for production. It turns out using 4 of the built in
>> >datatypes of the database result in the server being unable to restart
>> >without clearing out the commit logs and running a repair. That screams
>> >critical to me. You shouldn't even be able to install 3.5 without the
>> >patch I've supplied - that bug is a ticking time bomb for anyone that
>> >installs it.
>> >
>> >On Wed, Sep 14, 2016 at 8:12 PM Michael Shuler <mich...@pbandjelly.org>
>> >wrote:
>> >
>> >> What's preventing the use of the 3.6 or 3.7 releases where this bug is
>> >> already fixed? This is also fixed in the 3.0.6/7/8 releases.
>> >>
>> >> Michael
>> >>
>> >> On 09/14/2016 08:30 PM, Jonathan Haddad wrote:
>> >> > Unfortunately CASSANDRA-11618 was fixed in 3.6 but was not back
>> ported to
>> >> > 3.5 as well, and it makes Cassandra effectively unusable if someone
>> is
>> >> > using any of the 4 types affected in any of their schema.
>> >> >
>> >> > I have cherry picked & merged the patch back to here and will put it
>> in a
>> >> > JIRA as well tonight, I just wanted to get the ball rolling asap on
>> this.
>> >> >
>> >> >
>> >>
>> https://urldefense.proofpoint.com/v2/url?u=https-3A__github.com_rustyrazorblade_cassandra_tree_fix-5Fcommitlog-5Fexception&d=DQIBaQ&c=08AGY6txKsvMOP6lYkHQpPMRA1U6kqhAwGa8-0QCg3M&r=yfYEBHVkX6l0zImlOIBID0gmhluYPD5Jje-3CtaT3ow&m=MZ9nLcNNhQZkuXyH0NBbP1kSEE2M-SYgyVqZ88IJcXY&s=ktY5tkT-nO1jtyc0EicbgZHXJYl03DvzuxqzyyOgzII&e=
>> >> >
>> >> > Jon
>> >> >
>> >>
>> >>
>>
>
