Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

Echoing Jon’s point here – JH: “My thinking is I'd like to be able to recommend 4.0.0 as a production ready database for business critical cases” I feel that this is a standard that is both appropriate and achievable, and one I’m legitimately excited about. Re: the current state of the test pl

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

Hi Kyle, I understand your frustration here - I really do. There are a lot of awesome additions, features, etc. that have been stuck in purgatory for far longer than any of us would like. It will be worth it once we get 4.0 to a stable point as we will be in a much better position to iterate quick

Cloud resources donation?

Hey y'all, I am following up on a conversation we've had with Michael Shuler at Datastax Accelerate last week regarding cloud resources donation to the Apache Cassandra project. I am emailing the Cassandra developer mailing list per his suggestion. We, iland cloud [1], are a long time user of Apa

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving chats to ASF's Slack instance

+1 On Tue, May 28, 2019, 2:54 PM Joshua McKenzie wrote: > +1 to switching over. One less comms client + history + searchability is > enough to get my vote easy. > > On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 5:52 PM Jonathan Ellis wrote: > > > I agree. This lowers the barrier to entry for new participants. Slac

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving chats to ASF's Slack instance

+1 to switching over. One less comms client + history + searchability is enough to get my vote easy. On Tue, May 28, 2019 at 5:52 PM Jonathan Ellis wrote: > I agree. This lowers the barrier to entry for new participants. Slack is > probably two orders of magnitude more commonly used now than i

Re: [DISCUSS] Moving chats to ASF's Slack instance

I agree. This lowers the barrier to entry for new participants. Slack is probably two orders of magnitude more commonly used now than irc for sw devs and three for everyone else. And then you have the quality-of-life features that you get out of the box with Slack and only with difficulty in irc

[DISCUSS] Moving chats to ASF's Slack instance

Hi Folks, While working on ApacheCon last week, I had to get setup on ASF's slack workspace. After poking around a bit, on a whim I created #cassandra and #cassandra-dev. I then invited a couple of people to come signup and test it out - primarily to make sure that the process was seamless for non-

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

I think that was intent but ran out of time. There were 2 approaches to this, one being dumping the Metric's into a virtual table, and another to have specialized views (like nodetool). The later is started in CASSANDRA-14670 and still waitin

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

Hey all, Thought I’d chime in here as one of the people surprised that virtual tables for table stats weren’t being included in 4.0, especially given that QoL for administrators is one of the 4.0 promises. -Kyle Samson On 2019/05/28 16:39:59, Jon Haddad wrote: > Sept is a pretty long ways of

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

+1. Wiki could be useful to document what the overall plan. Jira to track progress. Dinesh > On May 28, 2019, at 10:20 AM, Joshua McKenzie wrote: > >> >> The unofficial rule is to not upgrade to prod till .10 is cut. > > FWIW, I believe it's historically .6. Which is still not a great look f

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

My thinking is I'd like to be able to recommend 4.0.0 as a production ready database for business critical cases of TLP customers. If it's not ready for prod, there's no way I'd vote to release it. The TLP tooling I've mentioned was developed over the last 6 months with the specific goal of being

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

> > The unofficial rule is to not upgrade to prod till .10 is cut. FWIW, I believe it's historically .6. Which is still not a great look for the project. There's a ton of work going into testing 4.0 already. While I intuitively and anecdotally (from the people I've backchanneled with) believe th

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

Hi Jon, When you say 4.0 release, how do u match it with 3.0 minor releases. The unofficial rule is to not upgrade to prod till .10 is cut. Also due to heavy investment in testing, I dont think it will take as long as 3.0 but want to know what is your thinking with this. Thanks, Sankalp

Re: "4.0: TBD" -> "4.0: Est. Q4 2019"?

Sept is a pretty long ways off. I think the ideal case is we can announce 4.0 release at the summit. I'm not putting this as a "do or die" date, and I don't think we need to announce it or make promises. Sticking with "when it's ready" is the right approach, but we need a target, and this is imo