To follow up on that question, is there a way to know if the last long
operation triggered through the JMX succeeded ? Still trying to find a way to
answer the question without looking at logs.
—
Cyril Scetbon
> On Aug 19, 2018, at 11:19 PM, Cyril Scetbon wrote:
>
> Hi,
>
> I want to trigger
> > contributions should be evaluated based on the merit of code and their
> > value add to the whole offering. I hope it does not matter whether that
> > contribution comes from PMC member or a person who is not a committer.
>
>
> I hope this goes without saying.
Absolutely.
Joseph and
+1 for separate repo. Especially on git. Maybe make it a submodule.
Rahul
On Aug 21, 2018, 3:33 PM -0500, Stefan Podkowinski , wrote:
> I'm also currently -1 on the in-tree option.
>
> Additionally to what Aleksey mentioned, I also don't see how we could
> make this work with the current build
I'm also currently -1 on the in-tree option.
Additionally to what Aleksey mentioned, I also don't see how we could
make this work with the current build and release process. Our scripts
[0] for creating releases (tarballs and native packages), would need
significant work to add support for an
+1 for separate repo. For pretty much all the same reasons Aleksey
elucidated.
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 10:20 AM, Aleksey Yeshchenko
wrote:
> Sure, allow me to elaborate - at least a little bit. But before I do, just
> let me note that this wasn’t a veto -1, just a shorthand for “I don’t like
>
Would anyone be interested in assisting me with writing the Center for
Internet Security(CIS) benchmark for Cassandra?
If so, shoot me an email i...@dbsec-it.com and let's chat.
Thanks, Joe
Sure, allow me to elaborate - at least a little bit. But before I do, just let
me note that this wasn’t a veto -1, just a shorthand for “I don’t like this
option”.
It would be nice to have sidecar and C* version and release cycles fully
decoupled. I know it *can* be done when in-tree, but the
Hi Aleksey,
Can you please elaborate on the reasons for your -1? This
way we can make progress towards any one approach.
Thanks,
Sankalp
On Tue, Aug 21, 2018 at 8:39 AM Aleksey Yeshchenko
wrote:
> FWIW I’m strongly -1 on in-tree approach, and would much prefer a separate
>
FWIW I’m strongly -1 on in-tree approach, and would much prefer a separate
repo, dtest-style.
—
AY
On 21 August 2018 at 16:36:02, Jeremiah D Jordan (jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com)
wrote:
I think the following is a very big plus of it being in tree:
>> * Faster iteration speed in general. For
I think the following is a very big plus of it being in tree:
>> * Faster iteration speed in general. For example when we need to add a
>> new
>> JMX endpoint that the sidecar needs, or change something from JMX to a
>> virtual table (e.g. for repair, or monitoring) we can do all changes
>>
Strongly agree with Blake. In my mind supporting multiple versions is
mandatory. As I've stated before, we already do it with Reaper, I'd
consider it a major misstep if we couldn't support multiple with the
project - provided admin tool. It's the same reason dtests are separate -
they work with
11 matches
Mail list logo
