Re: Git Repo Migration

+1 for the migration. Thanks for owning and leading this, Sam On Fri, Jan 4, 2019 at 02:58 Sam Tunnicliffe wrote: > As per the announcement on 7th December 2018[1], ASF infra are planning to > shutdown the service behind git-wip-us.apache.org and migrate all > existing repos to

Sidecar repo created

Hello all, In moving the sidecar project forward, I've created a gitbox [1] repo for the cassandra-sidecar which is located at: git: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf/cassandra-sidecar.git github: https://github.com/apache/cassandra-sidecar There are additional behaviors we can set on the

Re: Proposing an Apache Cassandra Management process

It looks like we have consensus to move forward with the sidecar I will be shepherding the project, and to that end, I'll create a repo against which we can start working. Thanks, -Jason On Fri, Nov 30, 2018 at 7:54 AM sankalp kohli wrote: > If no one has more feedback, we should create JIRAs

Re: [VOTE] Change Jira Workflow

+1. On Mon, Dec 17, 2018 at 7:36 AM Michael Shuler wrote: > +1 > > -- > Michael > > On 12/17/18 9:19 AM, Benedict Elliott Smith wrote: > > I propose these changes < > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/JIRA+Workflow+Proposals>* > to the Jira Workflow for the project. The

Re: Revisit the proposal to use github PR

To clarify my position: Github PRs are great for *reviewing* code, and the commentary is much easier to follow imo. But for *merging* code, esp into our multi-branch strategy, PRs don't fit well, unless there's some technique I and perhaps others are unaware of. On Thu, Dec 13, 2018 at 9:47 AM

Re: Revisit the proposal to use github PR

I'm with Sylvain and Aleksey. Our multi-branch strategy does not work well (if at all) with Github PR-style workflows (and, yes, I and most c* maintainers have played this game). The cassandra-dtests repo is different as we don't really branch there, so might be fine for Github PRs - except for

Re: Testing 4.0 upgrading

Hi Tommy, Thank you for taking the time to start kicking the tires on the upgrade to 4.0. It looks like you've found two bugs: 1) "Unknown column coordinator_port during deserialization" (reported on 3.x nodes) - looks like the 4.0 node isn't filtering out a column from a system table that 3.0

Re: Moving tickets out of 4.0 post freeze

Before we blanket update all of these, let's make sure they are not relevant for 4.0 - because some of them actually are. Some are docs, some are parent tickets, some are testing. Naively, here are some that are still 4.0: CASSANDRA-14746

Re: UDF

Hi Robert, Thanks for taking on this work. Is this message a heads up that a patch is coming/complete, or to spawn a discussion about including this in 4.0? Thanks, -Jason On Tue, Sep 11, 2018 at 2:32 AM, Robert Stupp wrote: > In an effort to clean up our hygiene and limit the dependencies

Re: NGCC 2018?

+1 to Jon's sentiment. Further, perhaps we should use that time after GA'ing 4.0 to poll our users what they need/want from the next major release of the database. On Wed, Sep 5, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Jonathan Haddad wrote: > I'm thinking a month or two after 4.0 would give us time to unwind after >

Re: [Discuss] Accept GoCQL driver donation

I find this idea interesting and worth a strong discussion. Something to consider is an argument floating around in the admin tool/side car discussion: if we take an existing project wholesale, we inherit all of it's design decision and technical debt (every project has these). On the other hand,

Re: Supporting multiple JDKs

Some of our java8 code will not compile under java11 (see CASSANDRA-9608); the symbols have literally been removed (Unsafe.monitorEnter() / Unsafe.monitorExit() ). Setting -source to "8" will not help. Thus, we need two compilers for the foreseeable future. On Thu, Aug 23, 2018 at 3:44 PM,

Re: Side Car New Repo vs not

+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 >

Re: upgrade guava on trunk before 9/1?

isberg wrote: > Hi, > > What do we get from Guava in exchange for upgrading? > > Ariel > > On Wed, Aug 15, 2018, at 10:19 AM, Jason Brown wrote: > > Hey all, > > > > Does anyone feel strongly about upgrading guava on trunk before the 9/1 > > feature freeze

upgrade guava on trunk before 9/1?

Hey all, Does anyone feel strongly about upgrading guava on trunk before the 9/1 feature freeze for 4.0? We are currently at 23.3 (thanks to CASSANDRA-13997), and the current is 26.0. I took a quick look, and there's about 17 compilation errors. They fall into two categories, both of which

Re: G1GC is now default

restored CMS as the default GC alg in CASSANDRA-14636. Thanks, -Jason On Wed, Aug 8, 2018 at 4:33 PM, Jason Brown wrote: > Hi Jon, > > Thanks for pointing that out. Looks like I missed that during the > CASSANDRA-9608 review. Robert and I didn't discuss that online or offlin

Re: G1GC is now default

Hi Jon, Thanks for pointing that out. Looks like I missed that during the CASSANDRA-9608 review. Robert and I didn't discuss that online or offline, so it's something that snuck in. I don't have a personal preference for GC algs right now, but at a minimum it would probably be appropriate to

triage of recent dtest failures

Hi all, Now that the vote is on for the next releases, I've done an initial triage of the failed dtest runs from 2.2, 3.0, and 3.11 (based on my circleci runs). Below are the ten dtest failures I found most often (not exhaustive, but representative), and I opened up corresponding jiras for them.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.17 (Take 2)

Ran the tests again, just for sanity sake, and all seems within acceptable levels (in order to get the data loss bugs resolved). +1 On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 1:24 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 7:47 PM Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.2.13

Ran the tests again, just for sanity sake, and all seems within acceptable levels. +1 On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 1:25 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 7:49 PM Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.2.13. > > > > sha1:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.3 (Take 2)

Ran the tests again, just for sanity sake, and all seems within acceptable levels (in order to get the data loss bugs resolved). +1 On Wed, Jul 25, 2018 at 1:24 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jul 25, 2018, 7:46 PM Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for

Re: reroll the builds?

ey're the same / similar, we know at least we're at parity with the > previous release :) > Dinesh > > On Tuesday, July 24, 2018, 8:18:50 AM PDT, Jason Brown < > jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > TL;DR We are in a better place than we were for the 3.0.16 and 3.11.

Re: reroll the builds?

ng dtests if needed. > Dinesh > > On Monday, July 23, 2018, 10:22:18 AM PDT, Jason Brown < > jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I spoke with some people over here, and I'm going to spend a day doing a > quick triage of the failing dtests. There are some fixes for data loss

Re: reroll the builds?

those fixes. Will have an update shortly ... -Jason On Mon, Jul 23, 2018 at 9:18 AM, Jason Brown wrote: > Hi all, > > First, thanks Joey for running the tests. Your pass/fail counts are > basically what in line with what I've seen for the last several months. (I > don't have an

Re: reroll the builds?

only want to go on green builds perhaps we can either disable the > flakey tests or fix them up? If someone feels strongly we should fix > particular tests up please link a jira and I can take a whack at some of > them. > > -Joey > > On Tue, Jul 17, 2018 at 9:35 AM Michael Shule

reroll the builds?

Hey all, The recent builds were -1'd, but it appears the issues have been resolved (2.2.13 with CASSANDRA-14423, and 3.0.17 / 3.11.3 reverting CASSANDRA-14252). Can we go ahead and reroll now? Thanks, -Jason

Re: 3.11 currently not building

Thanks for the quick turn around, Lerh and Paulo! On Thu, Jun 7, 2018 at 3:56 AM, Paulo Motta wrote: > Fixed bad merge to 3.11 with 7bb88deb4c6387fd67114543986774c903860de9. > Thanks for the heads up! > > 2018-06-07 2:34 GMT-03:00 Lerh Chuan Low : > > Hi guys, > > > > I saw your message on IRC

Re: 3.11.3

wrt releasing 3.11, +1 to this ... and additionally, 3.0 and 2.2. I'd propose we cut early next week (Monday) and anything that can get reviewed/committed from Kurt's list would be great. On Wed, Jun 6, 2018 at 5:22 AM, kurt greaves wrote: > We probably need to release 3.11.3 at some point

Re: Improve the performance of CAS

Hey all, Before we go bananas, let's see if Sylvain, the primary author of the original patch, has the opportunity to chime with some explanatory notes or other guidance. There may be some subtle points or considerations that are not obvious, and I'd hate to lose that context. Thanks, -Jason

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 9:31 AM, Ariel Weisberg <ar...@weisberg.ws> > wrote: > >> > >>> Hi, > >>> > >>> +1 to having a feature freeze date. June 1st is earlier than I would > have > >>> picked. > >>> > &g

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

+1 On Wed, Apr 4, 2018 at 8:31 PM, Blake Eggleston wrote: > +1 > > On 4/4/18, 5:48 PM, "Jeff Jirsa" wrote: > > Earlier than I’d have personally picked, but I’m +1 too > > > > -- > Jeff Jirsa > > > > On Apr 4, 2018, at 5:06 PM, Nate

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

The only additional tickets I'd like to mention are: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13971 - Automatic certificate management using Vault - Stefan's Vault integration work. A sub-ticket, CASSANDRA-14102, addresses encryption at-rest, subsumes CASSANDRA-9633 (SSTable encryption) -

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

I'm coming to be on-board with #3. One thing to watch out for (we can't account for it now) is how our dependencies choose to move forward. If we need to upgrade a jar (netty, for example) due to some leak or vulnerability, and it only runs on a higher version, we may be forced to upgrade the

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

ee what happens? And again, > what is the Apache Software Foundation's approach to this that affects so > many of their projects? > > On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 12:55 PM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Well, that was quick. TL;DR Redistributing any p

Re: Paying off tech debt and correctly naming things

Jon, Thanks for bringing up this topic. I'll admit that I've been around this code base for long enough, and have enough accumulated history, that I probably can't fully appreciate the impact for a newcomer wrt naming. However, as Josh points out, this situation probably happens to "every

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

Well, that was quick. TL;DR Redistributing any part of the OpenJDK is basically a no-go. Thus, that option is off the table. On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 10:46 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > ftr, I've sent a message to legal-discuss to inquire about the licensing

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

ftr, I've sent a message to legal-discuss to inquire about the licensing aspect of the OpenJDK as we've been discussing. I believe anyone can follow the thread by subscribing to the legal-discuss@ ML, or you can wait for updates on this thread as I get them. On Wed, Mar 21, 2018 at 9:49 AM, Jason

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

If we went down this path, I can't imagine we would build OpenJDK ourselves, but probably build a release with jlink or javapackager. I haven't done homework on that yet, but i *think* it uses a blessed OpenJDK release for the packaging (or perhaps whatever JDK you happen to be compiling/building

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

fwiw, a naive internet search turned up [1]. tl;dr use the java 9's jlink (or java8's javapackager) to build a full app+jre package for distribution. I started digging into the legal aspects, and (trying to) searching legal-discuss@. May just send an email to them later today to speed up this

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

> > >> Which is how you end up with what Jordan and ElasticSearch suggest. I'm > still +1 on that although in my heart of hearts I want to only support the > latest OpenJDK on trunk and after we cut a release only change the JDK if > there is a serious issue. > >> > &g

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

he changes necessary for the JDK releases higher than the LTS (if we following the elastic search model), perhaps it'll be a reasonably smooth transition? On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 1:31 PM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > copied directly from dev channel, just to keep with this ML conve

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

> So until Java 11 is out that would mean trunk should work under Java 8, > > > with the option of being compiled/run under Java 9 or 10. Once Java 11 > > > is out we could then switch to 11 only. > > > > > > -Jeremiah > > > > > > On Mar 20, 2018

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

otentially leave us in a situation where we're ready >> for a C* release but blocked waiting on a new LTS cut? For example, if >> JDK 9 were the currently supported LTS and trunk was on JDK 11, we'd >> either have to get trunk to work with 9 or wait for 11 to resolve >> that. >&g

Re: [DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

ady > for a C* release but blocked waiting on a new LTS cut? For example, if > JDK 9 were the currently supported LTS and trunk was on JDK 11, we'd > either have to get trunk to work with 9 or wait for 11 to resolve > that. > > On Tue, Mar 20, 2018 at 9:32 AM, Jason Brown <j

[DISCUSS] java 9 and the future of cassandra on the jdk

Hi all, TL;DR Oracle has started revving the JDK version much faster, and we need an agreed upon plan. Well, we probably should has this discussion this already by now, but here we are. Oracle announced plans to release updated JDK version every six months, and each new version immediate

Re: NVIDIA TESLA: The World's Most Advance Data Center GPU's for accelerating demanding HPC workloads

All, This is completely OFF-TOPIC for this mailing list. Please stop. -Jason On Thu, Mar 15, 2018 at 10:09 AM, daemeon reiydelle wrote: > Not so sure they are C* relevant, I build (100's of GPU enabled node) HPC's > that use them for ML, AI, Graph analytics, etc. with the

Re: Making RF4 useful aka primary and secondary ranges

I feel like we've had a very similar conversation (not so) recently: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/9952c419398a1a2f22e2887e3492f9d6899365f0ea7c2b68d6fbe0d4@%3Cuser.cassandra.apache.org%3E Which led to the creation of this JIRA: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13645 On

Re: Timeout unit tests in trunk

All, As @kjellman pointed out, the timeouts on ViewTest & ViewBuilderTaskTest are being addressed in CASSANDRA-14194 (I have a patch, almost ready to release). @dikang if you want to refactor those tests for fun, go for it - but note that

Re: Cassandra Needs to Grow Up by Version Five!

Hi all, I'd like to deescalate a bit here. Since this is an Apache and an OSS project, contributions come in many forms: code, speaking/advocacy, documentation, support, project management, and so on. None of these things come for free. Ken, I appreciate you bring up these usability topics;

Re: Release votes

Hi, I'm ecstatic others are now running the tests and, more importantly, that we're having the conversation. I've become convinced we cannot always have 100% green tests. I am reminded of this [1] blog post from Google when thinking about flaky tests. The TL;DR is "flakiness happens", to the

Re: [VOTE] (Take 2) Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.16

Nate, I can do this. On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > > > > My circleci test runs fail on lack of resources and I understand now > > that Jason used the circleci configuration from the trunk branch to run > > the 3.0 and 3.11 branches. These branches

Re: [VOTE] (Take 3) Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.2

I ran the unit tests and they are green: https://circleci.com/gh/jasobrown/workflows/cassandra/tree/3.11.2-candidate-2 +1. Thanks, Michael. On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 1:34 PM, Nate McCall wrote: > +1 > > On Thu, Feb 15, 2018 at 10:09 AM, Michael Shuler

Re: [VOTE] (Take 2) Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.16

I ran the unit tests, and all are green: https://circleci.com/gh/jasobrown/workflows/cassandra/tree/3.0.16-candidate-2 +1. Thank you, Michael. On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 12:51 PM, Brandon Williams wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Feb 14, 2018 at 2:40 PM, Michael Shuler

Re: [VOTE FAILED] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.16

> -- > Kind regards, > Michael > > On 02/14/2018 07:30 AM, Jason Brown wrote: > > I think we can attempt another build and vote now. > > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > >> CASSANDRA-14219 is c

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.16

I think we can attempt another build and vote now. On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:44 PM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > CASSANDRA-14219 is committed and tests look clean (https://circleci.com/ > workflow-run/d0a2622a-e74f-4c46-b0ad-a84ca063736f). > > On Tue, Feb 1

Re: [VOTE] (Take 2) Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.2

CASSANDRA-14234 (which fixes ReadCommandTest) is now committed. I think we can attempt another build and vote. Thanks, -Jason On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 6:16 PM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thank you, Kurt. I'll get to it within the next 12-24 hours (kids' > h

Re: [VOTE] (Take 2) Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.2

Thank you, Kurt. I'll get to it within the next 12-24 hours (kids' homework time in the U.S. now ;) ) -Jason On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 5:10 PM, kurt greaves wrote: > CASSANDRA-14234 > patch > in for ReadCommandTest if

Re: [VOTE] (Take 2) Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.2

, 2018 at 1:47 PM, Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> wrote: > I change my vote to -1 binding here, too. > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 3:45 PM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > -1, binding. Unit tests are broken: > > https://circleci.com/gh/jasobro

Re: [VOTE] (Take 2) Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.2

-1, binding. Unit tests are broken: https://circleci.com/gh/jasobrown/cassandra/452#tests/containers/60 Dave ninja-committed 7df36056b12a13b60097b7a9a4f8155a1d02ff62 to update some logging messages, which broke ViewComplexTest.

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.16

-1, binding. Unit tests are broken: https://circleci.com/gh/jasobrown/cassandra/451#tests/containers/50 Dave ninja-committed 7df36056b12a13b60097b7a9a4f8155a1d02ff62 to update some logging messages, which broke ViewComplexTest. The errors like this: junit.framework.AssertionFailedError: Expected

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.2.12

+1 On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 7:55 AM, Jon Haddad wrote: > +1 > > > > On Feb 13, 2018, at 7:21 AM, Marcus Eriksson wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 4:18 PM, Gary Dusbabek > wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> On Mon, Feb 12,

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.20

+1 On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 7:20 AM, Marcus Eriksson wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2018 at 1:30 PM, Aleksey Yeshchenko > wrote: > > > +1 > > > > — > > AY > > > > On 12 February 2018 at 20:30:58, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) > > wrote: > > > > I

Re: CASSANDRA-14183 review request -> logback upgrade to fix CVE

.1.11 is > > > > fixed for this, or if that might be less breakage? There are a pretty > > > > significant number of API-looking changes from 1.1.3 to 1.2.3, so I > do > > > > not wish to break other user's applications, as I have experienced. > > > >

Re: CASSANDRA-14183 review request -> logback upgrade to fix CVE

cketReceiver component which are not used in our > default settings (or by any install I have ever seen). > > > > -Jeremiah > > > >> On Feb 13, 2018, at 11:48 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> Ariel, > >> > >>

Re: CASSANDRA-14183 review request -> logback upgrade to fix CVE

Ariel, If this is a legit CVE, then we would want to patch all the current versions we support - which is 2.1 and higher. Also, is this worth stopping the current open vote for this patch? (Not in a place to look at the patch and affects to impacted branches right now). Jason On Tue, Feb 13,

Re: duration based config settings

I like this idea, but tbh I hate overburdening operators with what will seem them as busywork. Operators have scripts and other infrastructure to automate the creation of yaml files, and the thoughts of "oh crap, why did they rename all the properties? And, are these really just simple renames, or

Re: Stream is failing while removing the node

Varun, Please open a JIRA ticket with all the details of what you are seeing. Thanks, -Jason On Mon, Oct 9, 2017 at 7:54 PM, Varun Barala wrote: > Hi developers, > > Recently, I was removing one node from the cluster without downtime. > > Cluster size :: 3 node [test

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.15

+1 On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:00 Jon Haddad wrote: > +1 > > > On Oct 2, 2017, at 11:00 AM, Brandon Williams wrote: > > > > +1 > > > > On Oct 2, 2017 12:58 PM, "Aleksey Yeshchenko" wrote: > > > >> +1 > >> > >> — > >> AY > >> > >> On 2

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.1

+1 On Mon, Oct 2, 2017 at 11:01 Aleksey Yeshchenko wrote: > +1 > > — > AY > > On 2 October 2017 at 18:58:57, Michael Shuler (mich...@pbandjelly.org) > wrote: > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.11.1. > > sha1: 983c72a84ab6628e09a78ead9e20a0c323a005af > Git:

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.2.11

+1 On Thu, Sep 28, 2017 at 12:05 PM, Brandon Williams wrote: > +1 > > On Sep 28, 2017 1:41 PM, "Michael Shuler" wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.2.11. > > > > sha1: c510e001481637e1f74d9ad176f8dc3ab7ebd1e3 > > Git: > >

Re: Hints replay incompatible between 2.x and 3.x

Hi Andrew, This question is best for the user@ list, included here. Thanks, -Jason On Wed, Aug 30, 2017 at 10:00 AM, Andrew Whang wrote: > In evaluating 3.x, we found that hints are unable to be replayed between > 2.x and 3.x nodes. This introduces a risk during the

Re: jira rights

Malcolm, You should be able to comment on and assign tickets to yourself, and all the standard Jira use stuff. What specific behavior is not working for you? Thanks -Jason On Fri, Jul 21, 2017 at 08:36 Malcolm Taylor wrote: > Please grant me (malcolmt) contributor rights

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.18

+1 On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 17:52 Brandon Williams wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 3:18 PM, Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.1.18. > > > > sha1: 9369db1dfd92d4eb76284cfb68b1ffb9d22c9b06 > > Git: >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.2.10

+1 On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 16:52 Jeff Jirsa wrote: > +1 > > On Wed, Jun 21, 2017 at 1:20 PM, Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.2.10. > > > > sha1: 83f28ce3c4eeff75ce70855a56b6155047ce8e9a > > Git: > >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.0

+1 On Tue, Jun 20, 2017 at 10:37 AM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > +1 > > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 4:10 PM, Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.11.0. > > > > sha1: 88dee7e9d515ad94ecf8f2309f1e6138ec79e1a2 > > Git: >

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.14

+1 On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 14:12 Brandon Williams wrote: > +1 > > On Mon, Jun 19, 2017 at 3:37 PM, Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.14. > > > > sha1: f3e38cb638113c2a23855a104d6082da5bc10ddb > > Git: >

dtests and differing behavior across c* versions

Hey all, As I'm finalizing work on CASSANDRA-8457 and CASSANDRA-12229 (switching to netty for internode messaging and streaming), I need to update the a handful of existing dtests due to changes in a) grepping log for errors (primarily for TLS) b) byteman injections (primarily for streaming)

Re: dtests and differing behavior across c* versions

bah! sent too soon. will finish up and resend asap On Sat, Jun 17, 2017 at 8:20 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey all, > > As I'm finalizing work on CASSANDRA-8457 and CASSANDRA-12229 (switching to > netty for internode messaging and streaming), I need to upda

dtests and differing behavior across c* versions

Hey all, As I'm finalizing work on CASSANDRA-8457 and CASSANDRA-12229 (switching to netty for internode messaging and streaming), I need to update the a handful of existing dtests due to changes in a) byteman injections (primarily for streaming) b) grepping log for errors (primarily for TLS) As

Re: Is concurrent_batchlog_writes option used/implemented?

Hey Tomas, Thanks for finding these errors. Unfortunately, those are problems on the Datastax-hosted documentation, not the docs hosted by the Apache project. To fix those problems you should contact Datastax (I don't have a URL handy rn, but if one of the DS folks who follow this list can add

Re: NGCC Proposal (Was Re: NGCC?)

Bah! Jeff beat me to responding with essentially the same message. +1 for Tuesday and the venue. On Tue, Jun 13, 2017 at 11:44 AM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > Looks great to me - especially the venue. Date wise, Tuesday (19th) lets > people fly in on Monday instead of costing a

Re: Long running compaction on huge hint table.

Varun, This a message better for the user@ ML. Thanks, -Jason On Tue, May 16, 2017 at 3:41 AM, varun saluja wrote: > Hi Experts, > > We are facing issue on production cluster. Compaction on system.hint table > is running from last 2 days. > > > pending tasks: 1 >

Re: Integrating vendor-specific code and developing plugins

if they can add something to the project - as long as it is maintainable. Thanks, -Jason [1] https://mesos.apache.org/documentation/latest/committers/ On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 4:35 AM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylv...@datastax.com> wrote: > On Fri, May 12, 2017 at 12:29 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbr.

Re: CASSANDRA-13444: Fast Streaming Hist

Hey Fedor, I'll try to make some time in the next week to get to it, as my hands are all over streaming for 4.0. Thanks for being patient, -Jason On Tue, May 9, 2017 at 11:16 PM, Fedor Bobin wrote: > Hello, > > Could someone provide feedback (and possible merge) my

Re: Integrating vendor-specific code and developing plugins

Hey all, I'm on-board with what Rei is saying. I think we should be open to, and encourage, other platforms/architectures for integration. Of course, it will come down to specific maintainers/committers to do the testing and verification on non-typical platforms. Hopefully those maintainers will

Re: Soliciting volunteers for flaky dtests on trunk

I've taken CASSANDRA-13507 CASSANDRA-13517 -Jason On Wed, May 10, 2017 at 9:45 PM, Lerh Chuan Low wrote: > I'll try my hand on https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13182. > > On 11 May 2017 at 05:59, Blake Eggleston wrote: > > > I've

Re: Cassandra on RocksDB experiment result

I'm +1 on the idea of a pluggable storage engine. There's clearly a bandwidth problem for developing/reviewing/maintain multiple storage engines, but I think having the interface is a good thing and can enhance testability. At a minimum I think it's worthwhile to explore the storage engine

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.13

Alex and Sam T think CASSANDRA-13113 is not a deal breaker in terms of regression (from reading their comments on the JIRA), and Sam mentioned to me that it only affects trunk, so I'm going to +1 and will poke on CASSAADNRA-13113 to get it done as soon as it can be :) -Jason On Thu, Apr 13, 2017

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.13

+1 On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 4:26 PM, Brandon Williams wrote: > +1 > > On Tue, Apr 11, 2017 at 1:59 PM, Michael Shuler > wrote: > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.13. > > > > sha1: 91661ec296c6d089e3238e1a72f3861c449326aa > > Git:

Re: [VOTE] self-assignment of jira tickets

g> wrote: > > > +1 super binding. > > > > -- > > AY > > > > On 29 March 2017 at 16:22:03, Jason Brown (jasedbr...@gmail.com) wrote: > > > > Hey all, > > > > Following up my thread from a week or two ago ( > > > >

[VOTE] self-assignment of jira tickets

needing to be added to the contributors group first. https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/INFRA-11950 is an example of how to get this done with INFRA. Vote will be open for 72 hours. Thanks, -Jason Brown

Re: [VOTE] self-assignment of jira tickets

oops, hit sent too early. will send another email shortly On Wed, Mar 29, 2017 at 6:14 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hey all, > > Following up on my emai >

Re: [DISCUSS] Implementing code quality principles, and rules (was: Code quality, principles and rules)

re: code coverage (this could become it's own thread, and probably should) As somebody working on a new large feature (CASSANDRA-8457), I have a few thoughts/observations about code coverage. As a preface, though, I'll point out that we have jacoco (http://www.jacoco.org/jacoco/trunk/index.html)

Re: [VOTE] Ask Infra to move github notification emails to pr@

+1 On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 18:21 Anthony Grasso wrote: > +1 > > On 21 March 2017 at 09:32, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > > > There's no reason for the dev list to get spammed everytime there's a > > github PR. We know most of the time we prefer JIRAs for real

Re: [VOTE] Ask Infra to move github notification emails to commits@

+1 On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 3:02 PM, Brandon Williams wrote: > +1, we've had to explain this a thousand times here. > > On Mon, Mar 20, 2017 at 5:00 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > > > There's no reason for the dev list to get spammed everytime there's a > > github

Re: Code quality, principles and rules

, that might be harder to achieve - however, as the patch should come with *some* tests (unless it's a truly trivial patch), it might just work itself out. On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 11:19 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > As someone who spent a lot of time looking at the singlet

Re: Code quality, principles and rules

>> do we have plan to integrate with a dependency injection framework? No, we (the maintainers) have been pretty much against more frameworks due to performance reasons, overhead, and dependency management problems. On Thu, Mar 16, 2017 at 2:04 PM, Qingcun Zhou wrote: >

jira ticket assignment

Hey all, Currently, when a new contributor wants to have a ticket assigned to themselves, they cannot due to JIRA permissions. The contributor (or someone on behalf of the contributor) usually needs to contact the dev-channel and ask for the magical permissions to be granted, and there's only a

Re: Testing and jira tickets

ldn't be a big problem because if someone is > doing a lot of reviews they should be a committer right? > > Regards, > Ariel > > On Thu, Mar 9, 2017, at 01:51 PM, Jason Brown wrote: > > Hey all, > > > > A nice convention we've stumbled into wrt to patches submit

Re: Testing and jira tickets

any perf improvement or a regression as a result of the > > change, even though I've asked twice for that information. > > > > In addition to "does this thing break anything" we should be asking "how > > does this patch affect performance?" (and were the app

  1   2   3   >