We should not block merging configuration changes given it is a valid configuration - which I understand as it is correct, passes all config validations, it matches documented rules, etc. And this provided latest config matches those requirements I assume.
The failures should block release or we should not advertise we have those features at all, and the configuration should be named "experimental" rather than "latest". The config changes are not responsible for broken features and we should not bury our heads in the sand pretending that everything is ok. Thanks, śr., 14 lut 2024, 10:47 użytkownik Štefan Miklošovič < stefan.mikloso...@gmail.com> napisał: > Wording looks good to me. I would also put that into NEWS.txt but I am not > sure what section. New features, Upgrading nor Deprecation does not seem to > be a good category. > > On Tue, Feb 13, 2024 at 5:42 PM Branimir Lambov <blam...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> Hi All, >> >> CASSANDRA-18753 introduces a second set of defaults (in a separate >> "cassandra_latest.yaml") that enable new features of Cassandra. The >> objective is two-fold: to be able to test the database in this >> configuration, and to point potential users that are evaluating the >> technology to an optimized set of defaults that give a clearer picture of >> the expected performance of the database for a new user. The objective is >> to get this configuration into 5.0 to have the extra bit of confidence that >> we are not releasing (and recommending) options that have not gone through >> thorough CI. >> >> The implementation has already gone through review, but I'd like to get >> people's opinion on two things: >> - There are currently a number of test failures when the new options are >> selected, some of which appear to be genuine problems. Is the community >> okay with committing the patch before all of these are addressed? This >> should prevent the introduction of new failures and make sure we don't >> release before clearing the existing ones. >> - I'd like to get an opinion on what's suitable wording and documentation >> for the new defaults set. Currently, the patch proposes adding the >> following text to the yaml (see >> https://github.com/apache/cassandra/pull/2896/files): >> # NOTE: >> # This file is provided in two versions: >> # - cassandra.yaml: Contains configuration defaults for a "compatible" >> # configuration that operates using settings that are >> backwards-compatible >> # and interoperable with machines running older versions of >> Cassandra. >> # This version is provided to facilitate pain-free upgrades for >> existing >> # users of Cassandra running in production who want to gradually and >> # carefully introduce new features. >> # - cassandra_latest.yaml: Contains configuration defaults that enable >> # the latest features of Cassandra, including improved >> functionality as >> # well as higher performance. This version is provided for new >> users of >> # Cassandra who want to get the most out of their cluster, and for >> users >> # evaluating the technology. >> # To use this version, simply copy this file over cassandra.yaml, >> or specify >> # it using the -Dcassandra.config system property, e.g. by running >> # cassandra >> -Dcassandra.config=file:/$CASSANDRA_HOME/conf/cassandra_latest.yaml >> # /NOTE >> Does this sound sensible? Should we add a pointer to this defaults set >> elsewhere in the documentation? >> >> Regards, >> Branimir >> >
