Re: 0.6, 0.7, and the future

2010-02-18 Thread Jonathan Ellis
On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 2:49 PM, Ryan King r...@twitter.com wrote: On Thu, Feb 18, 2010 at 11:45 AM, Anthony Molinaro antho...@alumni.caltech.edu wrote: +1 (although I'm dreading the export from old sstables into new sstables, any ideas on how fast that might be?, and I guess any idea if a

0.6, 0.7, and the future

2010-02-17 Thread Jonathan Ellis
We're looking at branching 0.6 today and starting 0.7 work. 0.6 shaped up to be a really nice follow-up to 0.5, where we improved just about everything while keeping the upgrade path super easy. (We changed the network around again, but no disk changes, so it's just going to be

Re: 0.6, 0.7, and the future

2010-02-17 Thread Ryan King
On Wed, Feb 17, 2010 at 1:32 PM, Jonathan Ellis jbel...@gmail.com wrote: We're looking at branching 0.6 today and starting 0.7 work. 0.6 shaped up to be a really nice follow-up to 0.5, where we improved just about everything while keeping the upgrade path super easy.  (We changed the network

Re: 0.6, 0.7, and the future

2010-02-17 Thread Chris Goffinet
+1 from Digg -Chris On Feb 17, 2010, at 1:32 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: We're looking at branching 0.6 today and starting 0.7 work. 0.6 shaped up to be a really nice follow-up to 0.5, where we improved just about everything while keeping the upgrade path super easy. (We changed the