Either 3 or 4 looks as an appropriate approach for me. Ignite is no longer just an in-memory storage and we can not afford to force our users to migrate the data or configuration just because of the new cool feature in a new version. We should provide the same level of compatibility as RDBMS vendors do.
— Denis > On Sep 19, 2017, at 4:16 AM, Vladimir Ozerov <[email protected]> wrote: > > igniters, > > Ignite doesn't have compatibility for binary protocols between different > versions, as this would make development harder and slower. On the other > hand we maintain API compatibility what helps us move users to new versions > faster. > > As native persistence is implemented, new challenge appeared - whether to > maintain binary compatibility of stored data. Many approaches exist: > > 1) No compatibility at all - easy for us, nightmare for users (IMO) > 2) No compatibility, but provide migration instruments > 3) Maintain compatibility between N latest minor versions > 4) Maintain compatibility between all versions within major release > > The more guarantees we offer, the harder them to maintain, the better UX. > > Let's think on what compatibility mode we can offer to our users if any. > Any ideas? > > Vladimir.
