Hi Brandon, That sounds good. Will that fix be in 4.1, as it is the old nodes that don’t transmit the hints?
Thanks Paul > On 20 Dec 2024, at 13:41, Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I think after a discussion on #cassandra-dev yesterday, we are going > to remove the requirement for schema agreement to deliver hints, as > suggested by Jeff Jirsa. > > Kind Regards, > Brandon > > On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 7:43 AM Paul Chandler <p...@redshots.com> wrote: >> >> Hi Brandon, >> >> I am not sure which part changes after CASSANDRA-20118, there is still the >> system mismatch going to CASSANDRA_4 caused by the change in >> system.compaction_history, and going to UPGRADING, this is caused by the 2 >> different sstable formats, so nothing that CASSANDRA-20118 fixes. >> >> So while CASSANDRA-20118 improves things, it does not fix these specific >> issues, unless I have missed something? >> >>> On 19 Dec 2024, at 12:17, Brandon Williams <dri...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 19, 2024 at 4:11 AM Paul Chandler <p...@redshots.com> wrote: >>>> C*4 -> CASSANDRA_4 : There is a schema mismatch, and hints are not sent >>>> from C*4 node to C*5 nodes. >>>> CASSANDRA_4 -> UPGRADING: Repairs are not possible and Nodes cannot be >>>> added or replaced. >>>> UPGRADING-> NONE: No issues. >>> >>> I'll note this will change after CASSANDRA-20118 >>> >>>> Any thoughts on whether having SCM controlled by JMX/nodetool is a good >>>> idea? >>> >>> I think it's a good idea but it's tricky. As I said on 20118, "An >>> unfortunate consequence of our use of static initialization is that >>> once started, there is no way to change storage compatibility modes" >>> and all the columns are defined statically, so that will have to be >>> overcome. >>> >>> Kind Regards, >>> Brandon >>
