Re: [DISCUSS] changing default token behavior for 4.0

Sounds good to me. I'm going to play around with the algorithm and actually record some numbers/evidence over the next week to help us decide. On Tue, 25 Sep 2018 at 05:38, Joseph Lynch wrote: > I am a big fan of lowering the default number of tokens for many > reasons (availability, repair,

Re: Moving tickets out of 4.0 post freeze

My JIRA experience tells me it would be better to do a blanket update and then go back and fix anything that shouldn't have been updated. Shouldn't be hard that way either because everyones inbox will be flooded with emails, so as long as we all sanity check what got changed we should catch most

Re: Moving tickets out of 4.0 post freeze

Do we want to manage more versions than we do now? Why don’t we simply align these things to majors, like we’ve typically tried to anyway? I think it’s anyway better to decide on a strategy and find a versioning scheme that matches it, rather than to look for a strategy that matches our

Re: Moving tickets out of 4.0 post freeze

Before we blanket update all of these, let's make sure they are not relevant for 4.0 - because some of them actually are. Some are docs, some are parent tickets, some are testing. Naively, here are some that are still 4.0: CASSANDRA-14746

Re: [DISCUSS] changing default token behavior for 4.0

This was exactly the kind of problem I was foreseeing. I don't see any simple way of fixing it without introducing some shuffle-like nightmare that does a whole bunch of token movements though. On the other hand we could just document best practice, and also make it so that by default you have to