Pretty sure no one is considering post 2.6 Akka. Anyhow, just repeating here as in the referred thread. A cold start is a minor thing compared to having Pekko, so wouldn't block 1.0 over lacking hot migration.
On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 4:02 PM Claude Warren, Jr <[email protected]> wrote: > Does the Akka license proclude Apache from running Akka for testing > purposes? It might. If so, that would make it difficult if not impossible > to do the mixed cluster testing. > > Claude > > IANAL -- "but I play one on the internet" > > On Fri, Feb 17, 2023 at 2:46 PM Iain Hull <[email protected]> > wrote: > > > Thanks for your excellent work on pekko. I have been following this list > > with interest. > > > > Once there are stable release candidates for pekko and pekko-http I will > > be trialling it with some of our internal services, and will put them > > through our performance tests. I will send you the results as soon as > > possible. > > > > We are not big akka cluster users and would be happy to cold restart the > > affected services. Given this, as a hopeful user of pekko, my preference > > would be to see the rolling upgrade from akka added in 1.0.1 to allow > other > > users earlier access. > > > > I really support your effort and wish I could contribute more, I hope to > > in the future. > > > > Thanks, > > Iain. > > ________________________________ > > From: Daniel Schroeter <[email protected]> > > Sent: 17 February 2023 13:51 > > To: [email protected] <[email protected]> > > Subject: [External Sender] Re: [DISCUSS] Should we aim for mix-cluster > > compatibility in 1.0.x release of Pekko? > > > > I fully agree with Johannes. > > > > Furthermore I'd say that > > >could theoretically increase the amount of adoption/visibility > > might be true but having pekko released earlier without akka cluster > > compatibility would help far more in that regard. > > > > Daniel > > > > On 16.02.2023 13:06 , Johannes Rudolph wrote: > > > For me there's clearly no requirement to have that feature in 1.0. Why > > > would there be? > > > > > > Whether it is feasible to add this feature in the future depends > > > mostly on sponsoring. If any of the many companies that asked would be > > > able to step up and contribute that feature or pay for its development > > > and testing then we might get the feature, otherwise we won't (I'd be > > > glad to work on this if someone would sponsor it but my estimate would > > > be at least a month of work, since this is an enterprise feature that > > > will need support in deploying, testing it etc). > > > > > > To focus on our current state, there's no one who currently cares that > > > all the nightly cluster tests are green or that we organize machines > > > that could run the multi-node tests. So, we are far from adding any > > > new features in that area. > > > > > > Johannes > > > > > > On Thu, Feb 16, 2023 at 11:50 AM Matthew Benedict de Detrich > > > <[email protected]> wrote: > > >> Historically (even before Pekko was accepted into Apache Incubator) > > discussions have been made about implementing changes to Pekko so that it > > can run alongside Akka in existing Akka clusters which is necessary to > > migrate from Akka to Pekko (in a rolling release fashion) without having > to > > shut down the cluster. > > >> > > >> Initially it was planned to have such functionality in the 1.0.x > > release of Pekko since a non trivial amount of people asked for it. On > the > > one hand, having such functionality in Pekko 1.0.x would send a very > strong > > impression which could theoretically increase the amount of > > adoption/visibility however there are concerns about whether this is > > feasible without pushing the release out even further. > > >> > > >> My initial impressions is that the actual amount of technical work > > required to achieve this is not a lot (in fact arguably its even lower > than > > anticipated, i.e. see > > > https://urldefense.com/v3/__https://github.com/apache/incubator-pekko/issues/108*issuecomment-1400078644__;Iw!!Iz9xO38YGHZK!7uT1kNMwt1fHNY2dMiNaCQrK0IfmtBVmIeUQHiZqvk6gMbI0syb41v6NIxIMxL4-nmkciJhYc6v8dA$ > > ) but I predict largest bulk of work is not in the implementation of the > > necessary changes, but rather all of the mix cluster testing that needs > to > > be done in order to verify that everything works correctly and we didn't > > miss anything. > > >> > > >> Personally I think that doing this for 1.0.x is achievable without > > pushing the release out significantly but only if people within the Pekko > > community are willing to test mix cluster setups (on the assumption that > as > > mentioned before, the actual technical changes required aren't that > > extensive). As I see it, the most active committers right now are working > > at capacity on the large bucket list of changes that needs to be done to > > get Pekko release out (on top of that there are other competing concerns, > > i.e. trying to get snapshots for other Pekko modules so that at least the > > community can test/try it out) and at least for me I don't have the time > > (or even in house knowledge) on mix cluster testing. > > >> > > >> Thoughts? > > >> > > >> -- > > >> > > >> Matthew de Detrich > > >> > > >> Aiven Deutschland GmbH > > >> > > >> Immanuelkirchstraße 26, 10405 Berlin > > >> > > >> Amtsgericht Charlottenburg, HRB 209739 B > > >> > > >> Geschäftsführer: Oskari Saarenmaa & Hannu Valtonen > > >> > > >> m: +491603708037 > > >> > > >> w: aiven.io e: [email protected] > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] > > For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] > > > > >
