Re: TLP tools for stress testing and building test clusters in AWS

2019-05-05 Thread Anthony Grasso
Hi Stefan.

Sorry for the late reply. Just wanted to close the loop on this.

Glad you found the demo useful.

On related node, we found out what the issues was when we were going
through the demo. It was to do with one of the AZs in our account being
unavailable. Even though AWS says an AZ exists, it may still be unavailable
for use. When provisioning a cluster, you might get an error like this in
the log:

aws_instance.cassandra.3: Error launching source instance: Unsupported:
> Your requested instance type (r3.2xlarge) is not supported in your
> requested Availability Zone (us-west-2d). Please retry your request by not
> specifying an Availability Zone or choosing us-west-2c, us-west-2a,
> us-west-2b.


To address this, we've added an --azs flag which can be used as a
workaround when an AZ unavailable. You can use it by supplying the letter
of the AZ you want. For example --azs abc.

Regards,
Anthony


On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 15:49, Stefan Miklosovic <
stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:

> Thanks Anthony for going that proverbial extra mile to cover people in
> different time zones too.
>
> I believe other people will find your talk as helpful as we did.
>
> Regards
>
> On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 10:08, Anthony Grasso 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Stefan and devs,
> >
> > I have set up a zoom link for the TLP tool set intro that will be on in
> an
> > hours time (17 April 2019 @ 11:00AM AEST): https://zoom.us/j/272648772
> >
> > This link is open so if anyone else wishes to join they are welcome to do
> > so. I will be covering the same topics Jon is covering in his meeting
> > tomorrow.
> >
> > Regards,
> > Anthony
> >
> >
> > On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Anthony Grasso 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Stefan,
> > >
> > > Thanks for sending the invite out!
> > >
> > > Just wondering what do you think of the idea of having a Zoom meeting
> that
> > > anyone can join? This way anyone else interested can join us as well.
> I can
> > > set that up if you like?
> > >
> > > Cheers,
> > > Anthony
> > >
> > > On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 21:24, Stefan Miklosovic <
> > > stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi Anthony,
> > >>
> > >> sounds good. I ve sent you Hangouts meeting invitation privately.
> > >>
> > >> Regards
> > >>
> > >> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 14:53, Anthony Grasso <
> anthony.gra...@gmail.com>
> > >> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > Hi Stefan,
> > >> >
> > >> > I have been working with Jon on developing the tool set. I can do a
> Zoom
> > >> > call tomorrow (Wednesday) at 11am AEST if that works for you? We
> can go
> > >> > through all the same information that Jon is going to go through in
> his
> > >> > call. Note that I am in the same timezone as you, so if tomorrow
> > >> morning is
> > >> > no good we can always do the afternoon.
> > >> >
> > >> > Cheers,
> > >> > Anthony
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 22:38, Stefan Miklosovic <
> > >> > stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Hi Jon,
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I would like be on that call too but I am off on Thursday.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > I am from Australia so 5pm London time is ours 2am next day so
> your
> > >> > > Wednesday morning is my Thursday night. Wednesday early morning so
> > >> > > your Tuesday morning and London's afternoon would be the best.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > Recording the thing would be definitely helpful too.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 07:45, Jon Haddad 
> wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I'd be more than happy to hop on a call next week to give you
> both
> > >> > > > (and anyone else interested) a tour of our dev tools.  Maybe
> > >> something
> > >> > > > early morning on my end, which should be your evening, could
> work?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I can set up a Zoom conference to get everyone acquainted.  We
> can
> > >> > > > record and post it for any who can't make it.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > I'm thinking Tue

Re: TLP tools for stress testing and building test clusters in AWS

2019-04-16 Thread Anthony Grasso
Hi Stefan and devs,

I have set up a zoom link for the TLP tool set intro that will be on in an
hours time (17 April 2019 @ 11:00AM AEST): https://zoom.us/j/272648772

This link is open so if anyone else wishes to join they are welcome to do
so. I will be covering the same topics Jon is covering in his meeting
tomorrow.

Regards,
Anthony


On Wed, 17 Apr 2019 at 08:29, Anthony Grasso 
wrote:

> Hi Stefan,
>
> Thanks for sending the invite out!
>
> Just wondering what do you think of the idea of having a Zoom meeting that
> anyone can join? This way anyone else interested can join us as well. I can
> set that up if you like?
>
> Cheers,
> Anthony
>
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 21:24, Stefan Miklosovic <
> stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Anthony,
>>
>> sounds good. I ve sent you Hangouts meeting invitation privately.
>>
>> Regards
>>
>> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 14:53, Anthony Grasso 
>> wrote:
>> >
>> > Hi Stefan,
>> >
>> > I have been working with Jon on developing the tool set. I can do a Zoom
>> > call tomorrow (Wednesday) at 11am AEST if that works for you? We can go
>> > through all the same information that Jon is going to go through in his
>> > call. Note that I am in the same timezone as you, so if tomorrow
>> morning is
>> > no good we can always do the afternoon.
>> >
>> > Cheers,
>> > Anthony
>> >
>> >
>> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 22:38, Stefan Miklosovic <
>> > stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:
>> >
>> > > Hi Jon,
>> > >
>> > > I would like be on that call too but I am off on Thursday.
>> > >
>> > > I am from Australia so 5pm London time is ours 2am next day so your
>> > > Wednesday morning is my Thursday night. Wednesday early morning so
>> > > your Tuesday morning and London's afternoon would be the best.
>> > >
>> > > Recording the thing would be definitely helpful too.
>> > >
>> > > On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 07:45, Jon Haddad  wrote:
>> > > >
>> > > > I'd be more than happy to hop on a call next week to give you both
>> > > > (and anyone else interested) a tour of our dev tools.  Maybe
>> something
>> > > > early morning on my end, which should be your evening, could work?
>> > > >
>> > > > I can set up a Zoom conference to get everyone acquainted.  We can
>> > > > record and post it for any who can't make it.
>> > > >
>> > > > I'm thinking Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday morning, 9AM Pacific
>> (5pm
>> > > > London)?  If anyone's interested please reply with what dates work.
>> > > > I'll be sure to post the details back here with the zoom link in
>> case
>> > > > anyone wants to join that didn't get a chance to reply, as well as a
>> > > > link to the recorded call.
>> > > >
>> > > > Jon
>> > > >
>> > > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 10:41 AM Benedict Elliott Smith
>> > > >  wrote:
>> > > > >
>> > > > > +1
>> > > > >
>> > > > > I’m also just as excited to see some standardised workloads and
>> test
>> > > bed.  At the moment we’re benefiting from some large contributors
>> doing
>> > > their own proprietary performance testing, which is super valuable and
>> > > something we’ve lacked before.  But I’m also keen to see some more
>> > > representative workloads that are reproducible by anybody in the
>> community
>> > > take shape.
>> > > > >
>> > > > >
>> > > > > > On 12 Apr 2019, at 18:09, Aleksey Yeshchenko
>> > >  wrote:
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Hey Jon,
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > This sounds exciting and pretty useful, thanks.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > Looking forward to using tlp-stress for validating 15066
>> performance.
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > > We should touch base some time next week to pick a
>> comprehensive set
>> > > of workloads and versions, perhaps?
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >
>> > > > > >> On 12 Apr 2019, at 16:34, Jon Haddad 
>> wrote:
>> > > > > >>
>> > > > > >> I don't want t

Re: TLP tools for stress testing and building test clusters in AWS

2019-04-16 Thread Anthony Grasso
Hi Stefan,

Thanks for sending the invite out!

Just wondering what do you think of the idea of having a Zoom meeting that
anyone can join? This way anyone else interested can join us as well. I can
set that up if you like?

Cheers,
Anthony

On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 21:24, Stefan Miklosovic <
stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:

> Hi Anthony,
>
> sounds good. I ve sent you Hangouts meeting invitation privately.
>
> Regards
>
> On Tue, 16 Apr 2019 at 14:53, Anthony Grasso 
> wrote:
> >
> > Hi Stefan,
> >
> > I have been working with Jon on developing the tool set. I can do a Zoom
> > call tomorrow (Wednesday) at 11am AEST if that works for you? We can go
> > through all the same information that Jon is going to go through in his
> > call. Note that I am in the same timezone as you, so if tomorrow morning
> is
> > no good we can always do the afternoon.
> >
> > Cheers,
> > Anthony
> >
> >
> > On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 22:38, Stefan Miklosovic <
> > stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:
> >
> > > Hi Jon,
> > >
> > > I would like be on that call too but I am off on Thursday.
> > >
> > > I am from Australia so 5pm London time is ours 2am next day so your
> > > Wednesday morning is my Thursday night. Wednesday early morning so
> > > your Tuesday morning and London's afternoon would be the best.
> > >
> > > Recording the thing would be definitely helpful too.
> > >
> > > On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 07:45, Jon Haddad  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > I'd be more than happy to hop on a call next week to give you both
> > > > (and anyone else interested) a tour of our dev tools.  Maybe
> something
> > > > early morning on my end, which should be your evening, could work?
> > > >
> > > > I can set up a Zoom conference to get everyone acquainted.  We can
> > > > record and post it for any who can't make it.
> > > >
> > > > I'm thinking Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday morning, 9AM Pacific
> (5pm
> > > > London)?  If anyone's interested please reply with what dates work.
> > > > I'll be sure to post the details back here with the zoom link in case
> > > > anyone wants to join that didn't get a chance to reply, as well as a
> > > > link to the recorded call.
> > > >
> > > > Jon
> > > >
> > > > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 10:41 AM Benedict Elliott Smith
> > > >  wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > +1
> > > > >
> > > > > I’m also just as excited to see some standardised workloads and
> test
> > > bed.  At the moment we’re benefiting from some large contributors doing
> > > their own proprietary performance testing, which is super valuable and
> > > something we’ve lacked before.  But I’m also keen to see some more
> > > representative workloads that are reproducible by anybody in the
> community
> > > take shape.
> > > > >
> > > > >
> > > > > > On 12 Apr 2019, at 18:09, Aleksey Yeshchenko
> > >  wrote:
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Hey Jon,
> > > > > >
> > > > > > This sounds exciting and pretty useful, thanks.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > Looking forward to using tlp-stress for validating 15066
> performance.
> > > > > >
> > > > > > We should touch base some time next week to pick a comprehensive
> set
> > > of workloads and versions, perhaps?
> > > > > >
> > > > > >
> > > > > >> On 12 Apr 2019, at 16:34, Jon Haddad  wrote:
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> I don't want to derail the discussion about Stabilizing
> Internode
> > > > > >> Messaging, so I'm starting this as a separate thread.  There
> was a
> > > > > >> comment that Josh made [1] about doing performance testing with
> real
> > > > > >> clusters as well as a lot of microbenchmarks, and I'm 100% in
> > > support
> > > > > >> of this.  We've been working on some tooling at TLP for the last
> > > > > >> several months to make this a lot easier.  One of the goals has
> been
> > > > > >> to help improve the 4.0 testing process.
> > > > > >>
> > > > > >> The first tool we have is tlp-stress [2].  It's designed with a
> "get
> > > &g

Re: TLP tools for stress testing and building test clusters in AWS

2019-04-15 Thread Anthony Grasso
Hi Stefan,

I have been working with Jon on developing the tool set. I can do a Zoom
call tomorrow (Wednesday) at 11am AEST if that works for you? We can go
through all the same information that Jon is going to go through in his
call. Note that I am in the same timezone as you, so if tomorrow morning is
no good we can always do the afternoon.

Cheers,
Anthony


On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 22:38, Stefan Miklosovic <
stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:

> Hi Jon,
>
> I would like be on that call too but I am off on Thursday.
>
> I am from Australia so 5pm London time is ours 2am next day so your
> Wednesday morning is my Thursday night. Wednesday early morning so
> your Tuesday morning and London's afternoon would be the best.
>
> Recording the thing would be definitely helpful too.
>
> On Sat, 13 Apr 2019 at 07:45, Jon Haddad  wrote:
> >
> > I'd be more than happy to hop on a call next week to give you both
> > (and anyone else interested) a tour of our dev tools.  Maybe something
> > early morning on my end, which should be your evening, could work?
> >
> > I can set up a Zoom conference to get everyone acquainted.  We can
> > record and post it for any who can't make it.
> >
> > I'm thinking Tuesday, Wednesday, or Thursday morning, 9AM Pacific (5pm
> > London)?  If anyone's interested please reply with what dates work.
> > I'll be sure to post the details back here with the zoom link in case
> > anyone wants to join that didn't get a chance to reply, as well as a
> > link to the recorded call.
> >
> > Jon
> >
> > On Fri, Apr 12, 2019 at 10:41 AM Benedict Elliott Smith
> >  wrote:
> > >
> > > +1
> > >
> > > I’m also just as excited to see some standardised workloads and test
> bed.  At the moment we’re benefiting from some large contributors doing
> their own proprietary performance testing, which is super valuable and
> something we’ve lacked before.  But I’m also keen to see some more
> representative workloads that are reproducible by anybody in the community
> take shape.
> > >
> > >
> > > > On 12 Apr 2019, at 18:09, Aleksey Yeshchenko
>  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > Hey Jon,
> > > >
> > > > This sounds exciting and pretty useful, thanks.
> > > >
> > > > Looking forward to using tlp-stress for validating 15066 performance.
> > > >
> > > > We should touch base some time next week to pick a comprehensive set
> of workloads and versions, perhaps?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >> On 12 Apr 2019, at 16:34, Jon Haddad  wrote:
> > > >>
> > > >> I don't want to derail the discussion about Stabilizing Internode
> > > >> Messaging, so I'm starting this as a separate thread.  There was a
> > > >> comment that Josh made [1] about doing performance testing with real
> > > >> clusters as well as a lot of microbenchmarks, and I'm 100% in
> support
> > > >> of this.  We've been working on some tooling at TLP for the last
> > > >> several months to make this a lot easier.  One of the goals has been
> > > >> to help improve the 4.0 testing process.
> > > >>
> > > >> The first tool we have is tlp-stress [2].  It's designed with a "get
> > > >> started in 5 minutes" mindset.  My goal was to ship a stress tool
> that
> > > >> ships with real workloads out of the box that can be easily tweaked,
> > > >> similar to how fio allows you to design a disk workload and tweak it
> > > >> with paramaters.  Included are stress workloads that stress LWTs
> (two
> > > >> different types), materialized views, counters, time series, and
> > > >> key-value workloads.  Each workload can be modified easily to change
> > > >> compaction strategies, concurrent operations, number of partitions.
> > > >> We can run workloads for a set number of iterations or a custom
> > > >> duration.  We've used this *extensively* at TLP to help our
> customers
> > > >> and most of our blog posts that discuss performance use it as well.
> > > >> It exports data to both a CSV format and auto sets up prometheus for
> > > >> metrics collection / aggregation.  As an example, we were able to
> > > >> determine that the compression length set on the paxos tables
> imposes
> > > >> a significant overhead when using the Locking LWT workload, which
> > > >> simulates locking and unlocking of rows.  See CASSANDRA-15080 for
> > > >> details.
> > > >>
> > > >> We have documentation [3] on the TLP website.
> > > >>
> > > >> The second tool we've been working on is tlp-cluster [4].  This tool
> > > >> is designed to help provision AWS instances for the purposes of
> > > >> testing.  To be clear, I don't expect, or want, this tool to be used
> > > >> for production environments.  It's designed to assist with the
> > > >> Cassandra build process by generating deb packages or re-using the
> > > >> ones that have already been uploaded.  Here's a short list of the
> > > >> things you'll care about:
> > > >>
> > > >> 1. Create instances in AWS for Cassandra using any instance size and
> > > >> number of nodes.  Also create tlp-stress instances and a box for
> > > >> monitoring
> > > >> 2. 

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.21

2019-02-03 Thread Anthony Grasso
Hi Michael,

What you and Jon said makes sense.

You have addressed a follow up concern I had about making sure the site was
updated if we go ahead with making 2.1 EOL. I'm happy to help with site
changes if needed.

Cheers,
Anthony

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 11:31, Michael Shuler  wrote:

> My first couple sentences in the vote email were intended as a
> statement, based on a lack of concerns voiced on EOL of 2.1.
>
> I made a request for comment on EOL of 2.1 series a month ago, in
> "Subject: EOL 2.1 series?":
>
> https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/87ee2e3d13ea96744545ed8612496a93f8235747c4f60d0084b37bae@%3Cdev.cassandra.apache.org%3E
>
> Yes, I'm aware our download page states we support 2.1 until 4.0, but we
> do not really do so.
>
> The reality is that developers have been actively ignoring the branch,
> even when suggested to commit to the 2.1 branch. I can go dig up IRC
> logs and commits, but I really don't feel like it adds any value to the
> conversation. As Jonathan Haddad says, let's just be honest with users
> about what has already been happening independently.
>
> To continue stating we actively support 2.1 until 4.0 and actually
> follow through, the project should audit fixed bugs in 2.2+ and see if
> they still exist in 2.1, unfixed. I imagine there are a few. I know for
> sure of one that was not committed. Alternatively, we sunset the branch,
> make that change on the download page, and move on. I don't think it's
> right to continue telling users we are doing something, if we aren't and
> haven't been.
>
> Michael
>
> On 2/3/19 5:24 PM, Anthony Grasso wrote:
> > +1 non-binding, for the release of 2.1.21
> >
> > Regarding EOL of 2.1.x, did we announce in the past that 2.1.21 would be
> > the final release?
> >
> > According to the download <http://cassandra.apache.org/download/> page
> 2.1
> > is meant to be supported with critical fixes only until 4.0 is released.
> I
> > suspect that people may be relying on this, as I have seen a number 2.1.x
> > clusters still in production use.
> >
> > On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 07:09, Jonathan Haddad  wrote:
> >
> >> I think having the discussion around EOL is pretty important, in order
> to
> >> set the right expectations for the community.
> >>
> >> Looking at the commits for 2.1, there's hardly any activity going on,
> >> meaning it's effectively been EOL'ed for a long time now.  I think it's
> >> better that we be honest with folks about it.
> >>
> >> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 9:34 AM Nate McCall  wrote:
> >>
> >>> +1 on the release of 2.1.21 (let's focus on that in the spirit of
> >>> these other votes we have up right now).
> >>>
> >>> I don't feel the need to be absolutist about something being EOL.
> >>>
> >>> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 1:47 AM Stefan Podkowinski 
> >> wrote:
> >>>>
> >>>> What are we voting on here? Releasing the 2.1.21 candidate, or that
> 2.1
> >>>> would become EOL? Please let's have separate votes on that, if you
> want
> >>>> to propose putting 2.1 EOL (which I'm strongly -1).
> >>>>
> >>>>
> >>>> On 03.02.19 01:32, Michael Shuler wrote:
> >>>>> *EOL* release for the 2.1 series. There will be no new releases from
> >>> the
> >>>>> 'cassandra-2.1' branch after this release.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>
> >>>>> I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.1.21.
> >>>>>
> >>>>> sha1: 9bb75358dfdf1b9824f9a454e70ee2c02bc64a45
> >>>>> Git:
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/2.1.21-tentative
> >>>>> Artifacts:
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1173/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/2.1.21/
> >>>>> Staging repository:
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1173/
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The Debian and RPM packages are available here:
> >>>>> http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
> >>>>>
> >>>>> The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> >>>>>
> >>>>> [1]: CHANGES.txt:
> >>>>>
> >>>
> >>
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repo

Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.1.21

2019-02-03 Thread Anthony Grasso
+1 non-binding, for the release of 2.1.21

Regarding EOL of 2.1.x, did we announce in the past that 2.1.21 would be
the final release?

According to the download  page 2.1
is meant to be supported with critical fixes only until 4.0 is released. I
suspect that people may be relying on this, as I have seen a number 2.1.x
clusters still in production use.

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 07:09, Jonathan Haddad  wrote:

> I think having the discussion around EOL is pretty important, in order to
> set the right expectations for the community.
>
> Looking at the commits for 2.1, there's hardly any activity going on,
> meaning it's effectively been EOL'ed for a long time now.  I think it's
> better that we be honest with folks about it.
>
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 9:34 AM Nate McCall  wrote:
>
> > +1 on the release of 2.1.21 (let's focus on that in the spirit of
> > these other votes we have up right now).
> >
> > I don't feel the need to be absolutist about something being EOL.
> >
> > On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 1:47 AM Stefan Podkowinski 
> wrote:
> > >
> > > What are we voting on here? Releasing the 2.1.21 candidate, or that 2.1
> > > would become EOL? Please let's have separate votes on that, if you want
> > > to propose putting 2.1 EOL (which I'm strongly -1).
> > >
> > >
> > > On 03.02.19 01:32, Michael Shuler wrote:
> > > > *EOL* release for the 2.1 series. There will be no new releases from
> > the
> > > > 'cassandra-2.1' branch after this release.
> > > >
> > > > 
> > > >
> > > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.1.21.
> > > >
> > > > sha1: 9bb75358dfdf1b9824f9a454e70ee2c02bc64a45
> > > > Git:
> > > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/2.1.21-tentative
> > > > Artifacts:
> > > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1173/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/2.1.21/
> > > > Staging repository:
> > > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1173/
> > > >
> > > > The Debian and RPM packages are available here:
> > > > http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
> > > >
> > > > The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> > > >
> > > > [1]: CHANGES.txt:
> > > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/2.1.21-tentative
> > > > [2]: NEWS.txt:
> > > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/2.1.21-tentative
> > > >
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jon Haddad
> http://www.rustyrazorblade.com
> twitter: rustyrazorblade
>


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.0.18

2019-02-03 Thread Anthony Grasso
+1 non-binding

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 05:52, Jonathan Haddad  wrote:

> +1
>
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 9:44 AM Nate McCall  wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 4:32 PM Michael Shuler 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.0.18.
> > >
> > > sha1: edd52cef50a6242609a20d0d84c8eb74c580035e
> > > Git:
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.0.18-tentative
> > > Artifacts:
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1171/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.0.18/
> > > Staging repository:
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1171/
> > >
> > > The Debian and RPM packages are available here:
> > > http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
> > >
> > > The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> > >
> > > [1]: CHANGES.txt:
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/3.0.18-tentative
> > > [2]: NEWS.txt:
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/3.0.18-tentative
> > >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >
> > --
> Jon Haddad
> http://www.rustyrazorblade.com
> twitter: rustyrazorblade
>


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 3.11.4

2019-02-03 Thread Anthony Grasso
+1 non-binding

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 06:19, Jonathan Haddad  wrote:

> +1
>
> On Sun, Feb 3, 2019 at 9:35 AM Nate McCall  wrote:
>
> > On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 4:38 PM Michael Shuler 
> > wrote:
> > >
> > > I propose the following artifacts for release as 3.11.4.
> > >
> > > sha1: fd47391aae13bcf4ee995abcde1b0e180372d193
> > > Git:
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/3.11.4-tentative
> > > Artifacts:
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1170/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/3.11.4/
> > > Staging repository:
> > >
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1170/
> > >
> > > The Debian and RPM packages are available here:
> > > http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
> > >
> > > The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> > >
> > > [1]: CHANGES.txt:
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/3.11.4-tentative
> > > [2]: NEWS.txt:
> > >
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/3.11.4-tentative
> > >
> >
> > +1
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >
> >
>
> --
> Jon Haddad
> http://www.rustyrazorblade.com
> twitter: rustyrazorblade
>


Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 2.2.14

2019-02-03 Thread Anthony Grasso
+1 non-binding

On Mon, 4 Feb 2019 at 04:39, Nate McCall  wrote:

> On Sat, Feb 2, 2019 at 4:32 PM Michael Shuler 
> wrote:
> >
> > I propose the following artifacts for release as 2.2.14.
> >
> > sha1: af91658353ba601fc8cd08627e8d36bac62e936a
> > Git:
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/2.2.14-tentative
> > Artifacts:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1172/org/apache/cassandra/apache-cassandra/2.2.14/
> > Staging repository:
> >
> https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1172/
> >
> > The Debian and RPM packages are available here:
> > http://people.apache.org/~mshuler
> >
> > The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed).
> >
> > [1]: CHANGES.txt:
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/2.2.14-tentative
> > [2]: NEWS.txt:
> >
> https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/2.2.14-tentative
> >
>
> +1
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
>
>


Re: unsubscribe

2017-04-22 Thread Anthony Grasso
Hi Yang Su Li,

To unsubscribe, simply send an email to dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
.

Note, replying to this email does nothing to remove your email address from
the list.

For further information, please see
http://apache.org/foundation/mailinglists.html.

Kind regards,
Anthony

On 23 April 2017 at 10:18, 杨苏立 Yang Su Li  wrote:

> unsubscribe
> On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 11:57 AM, Nitija Patil  wrote:
>
> > unsubscribe
> >
> > On Thu, Apr 6, 2017 at 10:25 PM, Vineet Gadodia 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > unsubscribe
> > >
> > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 1:51 AM, Ksawery Glab 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > unsubscribe
> > > >
> > > > 2017-04-05 9:45 GMT+01:00 Nitija Patil :
> > > >
> > > > > unsubscribe
> > > > >
> > > > > On Wed, Apr 5, 2017 at 2:05 PM, 郑蒙家(蒙家)
>  > > com
> > > > >
> > > > > wrote:
> > > > >
> > > > > > unsubscribe
> > > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
>
>
> --
> Suli Yang
>
> Department of Physics
> University of Wisconsin Madison
>
> 4257 Chamberlin Hall
> Madison WI 53703
>


Re: splitting CQL parser & spec into separate repo

2017-03-21 Thread Anthony Grasso
This is a great idea

+1 (non-binding)

On 22 March 2017 at 07:04, Edward Capriolo  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 3:24 PM, Mark Dewey  wrote:
>
> > I can immediately think of a project I would use that in. +1
> >
> > On Tue, Mar 21, 2017 at 12:18 PM Jonathan Haddad 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > I created CASSANDRA-13284 a few days ago with the intent of starting a
> > > discussion around the topic of breaking the CQL parser out into a
> > separate
> > > project.  I see a few benefits to doing it and was wondering what the
> > folks
> > > here thought as well.
> > >
> > > First off, the Java CQL parser would obviously continue to be the
> > reference
> > > parser.  I'd love to see other languages have CQL parsers as well, but
> > the
> > > intent here isn't for the OSS C* team to be responsible for maintaining
> > > that.  My vision here is simply the ability to have some high level
> > > CQLParser.parse(statement) call that returns the parse tree, nothing
> > more.
> > >
> > > It would be nice to be able to leverage that parser in other projects
> > such
> > > as IDEs, code gen tools, etc.  It would be outstanding to be able to
> > create
> > > the parser tests in such a way that they can be referenced by other
> > parsers
> > > in other languages.  Yay code reuse.  It also has the benefit of making
> > the
> > > codebase a little more modular and a bit easier to understand.
> > >
> > > Thoughts?
> > >
> > > Jon
> > >
> >
>
> It turns out that a similar thing was done with Hive.
>
> https://calcite.apache.org/
>
> https://calcite.apache.org/community/#apache-calcite-one-planner-fits-all
>
> The challenge is typically adoption. The elevator pitch is like:
> "EVERYONE WILL SHARE THIS AND IT WILL BE AWESOME". Maybe this is the wrong
> word, but lets just say frenemies
> exist and they do not like control of something moving to a shared medium.
> Technical issues like ANTLR 3 vs ANTRL 4 etc.
> For something like Hive the challenge is the parser/planner needs only be
> fast enough for analytic queries but that would not
> be the right move for say CQL.
>


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

2017-03-20 Thread Anthony Grasso
+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 code PRs, but
> with docs being in tree and low barrier to entry, we may want to accept
> docs through PRs ( see https://issues.apache.org/
> jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13256
> , and comment on it if you disagree).
>
> To make that viable, we should make it not spam dev@ with every comment.
> Therefore I propose we move github PR comments/actions to pr@ so as
> not to clutter the dev@ list.
>
> Voting to remain open for 72 hours.
>
> - Jeff
>


Re: Can we kill the wiki?

2017-03-17 Thread Anthony Grasso
+1 to killing the wiki as well. If that is not possible, we should at least
put a note on there saying it is deprecated and point people to the new
docs.

On 18 March 2017 at 08:09, Jonathan Haddad  wrote:

> +1 to killing the wiki.
>
> On Fri, Mar 17, 2017 at 2:08 PM Blake Eggleston 
> wrote:
>
> > With CASSANDRA-8700, docs were moved in tree, with the intention that
> they
> > would replace the wiki. However, it looks like we’re still getting
> regular
> > requests to edit the wiki. It seems like we should be directing these
> folks
> > to the in tree docs and either disabling edits for the wiki, or just
> > removing it entirely, and replacing it with a link to the hosted docs.
> I'd
> > prefer we just remove it myself, makes things less confusing for
> newcomers.
> >
> > Does that seem reasonable to everyone?
>


Re: Contribute to the Cassandra wiki

2017-03-13 Thread Anthony Grasso
On 14 March 2017 at 03:55, Jonathan Haddad  wrote:

>
> I urge you to try giving the in-tree docs a chance.  It may not be the way
> *you* want it but I have to point out that they're the best we've seen in
> Cassandra world.  Making them prettier won't help anything.
>

Agreed


>
> Part of CASSANDRA-8700 was to shut down the wiki.  I still advocate for
> this. At the very minimum we should make it read only with a big notice
> that points people to the in-tree docs.
>

Agreed. Am unable to see the value that the old wiki provides. We should at
the very least change it to say it is deprecated and point to the in-tree
docs. I am more than happy to make these changes if we think this is a good
idea.


>
> On Mon, Mar 13, 2017 at 8:49 AM Jeremy Hanna 
> wrote:
>
> > The moinmoin wiki was preferred but because of spam, images couldn’t be
> > attached.  The options were to use confluence or have a moderated list of
> > individuals be approved to update the wiki.  The decision was made to go
> > with the latter because of the preference to stick with moinmoin rather
> > than confluence.  That’s my understanding of the history there.  I don’t
> > know if people would like to revisit using one or the other at this
> point,
> > though it would take a bit of work to convert.
> >
> > > On Mar 13, 2017, at 9:42 AM, Nate McCall  wrote:
> > >
> > >> Isn't there a way to split tech docs (aka reference) and more
> > >> user-generated and use-case related/content oriented docs? And maybe
> to
> > use
> > >> a more modern WIKI software or scheme. The CS wiki looks like 1998.
> > >
> > > The wiki is what ASF Infra provides by default. Agree that it is a bit
> > > "old-school."
> > >
> > > I'll ask around about what other projects are doing (or folks who are
> > > involved in other ASF projects, please chime in).
> >
> >
>


Contribute to the Cassandra wiki

2017-03-12 Thread Anthony Grasso
Hi

My username is AnthonyGrasso and I would like to contribute to the
Cassandra wiki please.

Kind regards,
Anthony