+1 non-binding
made sure the hadoop integration still passed some basic tests. I'm hoping to
get more sophisticated wrt tests with the hadoop support, but for now that's
all I've got. Tx for all the great work both with 0.7.1 and with the
distributed tests to check for more sophisticated scen
strong unbinding +1 :)
I think that there were several lessons learned in the 0.6.x line about walking
that line. Wrt regression testing, hopefully the distributed tests (thanks Stu
and Kelvin and others!) will act as a core for something like that. I would
imagine that heavy loads can be uti
So from here I guess it's a matter of working out the comments/concerns
presented on 1311 and any future discussion sounds like it belongs there.
Like I said, I just wanted to initiate discussion since it had been a while and
the dust from 0.7 had settled. It seems like an incredibly useful con
+1
Passes the distributed tests.
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 9:52 AM, Eric Evans wrote:
>
> I propose the following for release as 0.7.1.
>
> SVN:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cassandra/branches/cassandra-0.7@r1069461
> 0.7.1 artifacts: http://people.apache.org/~eevans
>
> The vote will be op
+1
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 11:52, Eric Evans wrote:
>
> I propose the following for release as 0.7.1.
>
> SVN:
> https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cassandra/branches/cassandra-0.7@r1069461
> 0.7.1 artifacts: http://people.apache.org/~eevans
>
> The vote will be open for 72 hours.
>
> [1]: http://g
As the dude that worked on the 1016 prototype, I agree with this.
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Stu Hood wrote:
> Honestly, I think we should just mark 1016 a dupe and move forward with
> 1311: we won't be hurting anyone's feelings, and the implementation from
> 1016 is: 1. much, much less co
Honestly, I think we should just mark 1016 a dupe and move forward with
1311: we won't be hurting anyone's feelings, and the implementation from
1016 is: 1. much, much less complete, 2. abandoned.
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:
> Thanks Maxim - I'll just go ahead and BCC yo
+1
I'm also concerned with our lack of regression testing. A lot of this is
done by individual committers firing up EC2 clusters and running basic
sanity checks and workloads. Most of the bugs we are finding pop up under
heavy load.
It would be great if the community could identify and contribu
Here is my chronology:
- I turned on my current cluster in early December, starting with
about 0.7 RC2 or thereabouts. I ran into a number of problems but was able
to get things more or less ironed out (upgrading to new versions pretty
quickly). Once 0.7.0 was released, I had no problems
+1.
Cassandra has matured a lot lately and more users are relying heavily on it in
production. For those users, including us, stability and predictability becomes
very important.
Not including new and potentially unstable features in maintenance releases is
an easy way to decrease risk at a lo
Thanks Maxim - I'll just go ahead and BCC you and Hentschel and move the
discussion to the dev list.
Based on the comments on 1311 - did you have anything else to add to that -
could we unify around 1016 or 1311 and work on getting that to a general state
of acceptance? Were there any that wer
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 11:07 AM, Peter Schuller
wrote:
> For example, from the point of view of the user, I think that
> things like CASSANDRA-1992 should preferably result in an almost
> immediate bugfix-only release with instructions and impact information
> for users.
+1
--
Jonathan Ellis
P
> I'm willing to concede that I may have an abnormally conservative
> opinion about this. But I wanted to voice my concern in hopes we can
> improve the quality and delivery of our maintenance releases.
(speaking now from the perspective of a consumer, disregarding the
implications on development
Qualified +1 from me -- I went back and checked the 3 prior 0.7.1
votes, and all of them were canceled because of regressions from the
#1905/#1959/#2058 series, which was a bug fix ("make dynamic snitch
actually work") not a new feature. It turned out to be more work to
get all the corner cases wo
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Gary Dusbabek wrote:
> I've been uncomfortable with the amount of features I perceive are
> going into our maintenance releases for a while now. I thought it
> would stop after we committed ourselves to having a more predictable
> major release schedule. But gett
I've been uncomfortable with the amount of features I perceive are
going into our maintenance releases for a while now. I thought it
would stop after we committed ourselves to having a more predictable
major release schedule. But getting 0.7.1 out feels like it's taken a
lot more effort than it s
On 10 February 2011 18:49, Stephen Connolly
wrote:
> I'll restage central artifacts by tommorrow morning. hoping this is the last
> take
>
> - Stephen
>
> ---
> Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense
> words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to
17 matches
Mail list logo