I can commit some resources on my team - especially as we onboard some of our summer apprentices.
I have some proprietary stress tools geared for Cassandra read / writes that are a little better and creates a little more realistic data than Cassandra stress. -- Rahul Singh rahul.si...@anant.us Anant Corporation On Apr 12, 2018, 3:41 PM -0400, Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com>, wrote: > Ok. So who's willing to test 4.0 on June 2nd? Let's start a sign up. > > We (tlp) will put some resources on this via going through some canned > scenarios we have internally. We aren't in a position to test data validity > (yet) but we can do a lot around cluster behavior. > > Who else has specific stuff they are willing to do? Even if it's just > tee'ing prod traffic, that would be hugely valuable. > > On Fri, Apr 13, 2018, 6:15 AM Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 9:41 AM, Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com > > wrote: > > > > > It sounds to me (please correct me if I'm wrong) like Jeff is arguing > > that > > > releasing 4.0 in 2 months isn't worth the effort of evaluating it, > > because > > > it's a big task and there's not enough stuff in 4.0 to make it > > worthwhile. > > > > > > > > More like "not enough stuff in 4.0 to make it worthwhile for the people I > > personally know to be willing and able to find the weird bugs". > > > > > > > If that is the case, I'm not quite sure how increasing the surface area > > of > > > changed code which needs to be vetted is going to make the process any > > > easier. > > > > > > It changes the interest level of at least some of the people able to > > properly test it from "not willing" to "willing". > > > > Totally possible that there exist people who are willing and able to find > > and fix those bugs, who just haven't committed to it in this thread. That's > > probably why Sankalp keeps asking who's actually willing to do the testing > > on June 2 - if nobody's going to commit to doing real testing on June 2, > > all we're doing is adding inconvenience to those of us who'd be willing to > > do it later in the year. > >
