[VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.0.3
Proposing the test build of Cassandra 4.0.3 for release. sha1: a87055d56a33a9b17606f14535f48eb461965b82 Git: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=shortlog;h=refs/tags/4.0.3-tentative Maven Artifacts: https://repository.apache.org/content/repositories/orgapachecassandra-1259/org/apache/cassandra/cassandra-all/4.0.3/ The Source and Build Artifacts, and the Debian and RPM packages and repositories, are available here: https://dist.apache.org/repos/dist/dev/cassandra/4.0.3/ The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed). Everyone who has tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members are considered binding. A vote passes if there are at least three binding +1s and no -1's. [1]: CHANGES.txt: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=CHANGES.txt;hb=refs/tags/4.0.3-tentative [2]: NEWS.txt: https://gitbox.apache.org/repos/asf?p=cassandra.git;a=blob_plain;f=NEWS.txt;hb=refs/tags/4.0.3-tentative
Re: [RELEASE] Apache Cassandra 4.0.2 released
Agree Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 13, 2022, at 5:53 AM, Ekaterina Dimitrova > wrote: > > > “ We sadly don’t document when a config is free to remove, we should do that > to enhance our warnings to users as well as make clear when free to remove; > we spoke about this in 4.0 timeline that your deprecate in X.0.0 and remove > in (X+1).0.0, we should document this in code for each config” > > This and IMHO it should be absolutely clear where deprecated means that > things are still usable (but will be removed) and where it means that they > are removed(maybe replaced by different solution) and this is just a > placeholder. > >> On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 at 8:34, David Capwell wrote: >> In CASSANDRA-17166 I am adding a test that detects breaking changes; this is >> not compile time, rather test case time… >> >> We sadly don’t document when a config is free to remove, we should do that >> to enhance our warnings to users as well as make clear when free to remove; >> we spoke about this in 4.0 timeline that your deprecate in X.0.0 and remove >> in (X+1).0.0, we should document this in code for each config >> >> Sent from my iPhone >> On Feb 12, 2022, at 10:54 AM, Dinesh Joshi wrote: >>> +1 on introducing compile time checks to ensure backward compatibility. >> >>> >>> Confusion due to usage of deprecated settings is understandable. However, >>> settings marked deprecated should produce a warning in logs so that the >>> operators become aware of their usage in the YAML and can migrate to the >>> newer settings. >>> >>> Also breakages do happen once in a while. As long as we fix them quickly >>> and/or revert the code in the meanwhile it's fine. >>> On Feb 12, 2022, at 3:56 AM, Ekaterina Dimitrova wrote: 15234 was a discussion about changing names and making parameters work with the old ones. Still working parameters, backward compatibility and not placeholders. Benedict, I can understand that when I said removal in this ticket you thought I will deprecate in Config but unfortunately it is not what I meant. I should have asked you also for review. I take the responsibility of doing a mistake here by removing in minor release thinking this is a bug that leads to dangerous confusion you can still use them. Indeed CHANGES.txt entry was created but not NEWS.txt and it requires a person to check which exact parameters were removed to take an action. I pushed a patch already to fix this. Docs are also on the way now when ADOC migration is over. One of the yaml parameters was actually also already removed with the rewrite of the messaging system in 4.0. I added back that one to Config too yesterday, to be on the safe side. “ I wonder if we should introduce a compile time check that validates config compatibility with prior versions, to avoid this in future” I think David is working on some tests to catch removed config in trunk, I will follow up on Monday with him. > On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 at 5:49, bened...@apache.org > wrote: > As discussed on 15234, there is never a rush to remove Config parameters, > and it should only be done when there’s some clear value. Since the > overhead of having an unused parameter is ~zero, in my opinion this > occurs only when we really need the operator to consider the semantic > impact of its deprecation. > > > > We should never break minor upgrades, but we shouldn’t break any upgrade > unnecessarily. > > > > I wonder if we should introduce a compile time check that validates > config compatibility with prior versions, to avoid this in future. > > > > From: Dinesh Joshi > Date: Saturday, 12 February 2022 at 00:09 > To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > Subject: Re: [RELEASE] Apache Cassandra 4.0.2 released > > We should also have deprecation guidance in Config.java. This will help > when anybody is making changes in the future. > > > > > On Feb 11, 2022, at 3:07 PM, Ekaterina Dimitrova > wrote: > > > > Note taken, I had to document only in 4.0.x that those are placeholder. I > just opened ticket to fix that - CASSANDRA-17377. I am going to submit a > patch soon > > > > On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 17:44, Jeff Jirsa wrote: > > We don't HAVE TO remove the Config.java entry - we can mark it as > deprecated and ignored and remove it in a future version (and you could > update Config.java to log a message about having a deprecated config > option). It's a much better operator experience: log for a major version, > then remove in the next. > > > > On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 2:41 PM Ekaterina Dimitrova > wrote: > > This had to be removed in 4.0
Re: [RELEASE] Apache Cassandra 4.0.2 released
“ We sadly don’t document when a config is free to remove, we should do that to enhance our warnings to users as well as make clear when free to remove; we spoke about this in 4.0 timeline that your deprecate in X.0.0 and remove in (X+1).0.0, we should document this in code for each config” This and IMHO it should be absolutely clear where deprecated means that things are still usable (but will be removed) and where it means that they are removed(maybe replaced by different solution) and this is just a placeholder. On Sun, 13 Feb 2022 at 8:34, David Capwell wrote: > In CASSANDRA-17166 I am adding a test that detects breaking changes; this > is not compile time, rather test case time… > > We sadly don’t document when a config is free to remove, we should do that > to enhance our warnings to users as well as make clear when free to remove; > we spoke about this in 4.0 timeline that your deprecate in X.0.0 and remove > in (X+1).0.0, we should document this in code for each config > > Sent from my iPhone > > On Feb 12, 2022, at 10:54 AM, Dinesh Joshi wrote: > > +1 on introducing compile time checks to ensure backward compatibility. > > > Confusion due to usage of deprecated settings is understandable. However, > settings marked deprecated should produce a warning in logs so that the > operators become aware of their usage in the YAML and can migrate to the > newer settings. > > Also breakages do happen once in a while. As long as we fix them quickly > and/or revert the code in the meanwhile it's fine. > > On Feb 12, 2022, at 3:56 AM, Ekaterina Dimitrova > wrote: > > 15234 was a discussion about changing names and making parameters work > with the old ones. Still working parameters, backward compatibility and > not placeholders. > > Benedict, I can understand that when I said removal in this ticket you > thought I will deprecate in Config but unfortunately it is not what I > meant. I should have asked you also for review. I take the responsibility > of doing a mistake here by removing in minor release thinking this is a bug > that leads to dangerous confusion you can still use them. Indeed > CHANGES.txt entry was created but not NEWS.txt and it requires a person to > check which exact parameters were removed to take an action. I pushed a > patch already to fix this. Docs are also on the way now when ADOC migration > is over. > > One of the yaml parameters was actually also already removed with the > rewrite of the messaging system in 4.0. I added back that one to Config too > yesterday, to be on the safe side. > > “ I wonder if we should introduce a compile time check that validates > config compatibility with prior versions, to avoid this in future” > > I think David is working on some tests to catch removed config in trunk, I > will follow up on Monday with him. > > On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 at 5:49, bened...@apache.org > wrote: > >> As discussed on 15234, there is never a rush to remove Config parameters, >> and it should only be done when there’s some clear value. Since the >> overhead of having an unused parameter is ~zero, in my opinion this occurs >> only when we really need the operator to consider the semantic impact of >> its deprecation. >> >> >> >> We should never break minor upgrades, but we shouldn’t break any upgrade >> unnecessarily. >> >> >> >> I wonder if we should introduce a compile time check that validates >> config compatibility with prior versions, to avoid this in future. >> >> >> >> *From: *Dinesh Joshi >> *Date: *Saturday, 12 February 2022 at 00:09 >> *To: *dev@cassandra.apache.org >> *Subject: *Re: [RELEASE] Apache Cassandra 4.0.2 released >> >> We should also have deprecation guidance in Config.java. This will help >> when anybody is making changes in the future. >> >> >> >> On Feb 11, 2022, at 3:07 PM, Ekaterina Dimitrova >> wrote: >> >> >> >> Note taken, I had to document only in 4.0.x that those are placeholder. I >> just opened ticket to fix that - CASSANDRA-17377. I am going to submit a >> patch soon >> >> >> >> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 17:44, Jeff Jirsa wrote: >> >> We don't HAVE TO remove the Config.java entry - we can mark it as >> deprecated and ignored and remove it in a future version (and you could >> update Config.java to log a message about having a deprecated config >> option). It's a much better operator experience: log for a major version, >> then remove in the next. >> >> >> >> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 2:41 PM Ekaterina Dimitrova < >> e.dimitr...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> This had to be removed in 4.0 but it wasn’t. The patch mentioned did it >> to fix a bug that gives impression those work. Confirmed with Benedict on >> the ticket. >> >> >> >> I agree I absolutely had to document it better, a ticket for >> documentation was opened but it slipped from my mind with this emergency >> release this week. It is unfortunate it is still in our backlog after the >> ADOC migration. >> >> >> >> Note taken. I truly apologize and I am going to prioritize >>
Re: [RELEASE] Apache Cassandra 4.0.2 released
In CASSANDRA-17166 I am adding a test that detects breaking changes; this is not compile time, rather test case time… We sadly don’t document when a config is free to remove, we should do that to enhance our warnings to users as well as make clear when free to remove; we spoke about this in 4.0 timeline that your deprecate in X.0.0 and remove in (X+1).0.0, we should document this in code for each config Sent from my iPhone > On Feb 12, 2022, at 10:54 AM, Dinesh Joshi wrote: > > +1 on introducing compile time checks to ensure backward compatibility. > > Confusion due to usage of deprecated settings is understandable. However, > settings marked deprecated should produce a warning in logs so that the > operators become aware of their usage in the YAML and can migrate to the > newer settings. > > Also breakages do happen once in a while. As long as we fix them quickly > and/or revert the code in the meanwhile it's fine. > >> On Feb 12, 2022, at 3:56 AM, Ekaterina Dimitrova >> wrote: >> >> 15234 was a discussion about changing names and making parameters work with >> the old ones. Still working parameters, backward compatibility and not >> placeholders. >> >> Benedict, I can understand that when I said removal in this ticket you >> thought I will deprecate in Config but unfortunately it is not what I meant. >> I should have asked you also for review. I take the responsibility of doing >> a mistake here by removing in minor release thinking this is a bug that >> leads to dangerous confusion you can still use them. Indeed CHANGES.txt >> entry was created but not NEWS.txt and it requires a person to check which >> exact parameters were removed to take an action. I pushed a patch already to >> fix this. Docs are also on the way now when ADOC migration is over. >> >> One of the yaml parameters was actually also already removed with the >> rewrite of the messaging system in 4.0. I added back that one to Config too >> yesterday, to be on the safe side. >> >> “ I wonder if we should introduce a compile time check that validates config >> compatibility with prior versions, to avoid this in future” >> >> I think David is working on some tests to catch removed config in trunk, I >> will follow up on Monday with him. >> >> On Sat, 12 Feb 2022 at 5:49, bened...@apache.org wrote: >>> As discussed on 15234, there is never a rush to remove Config parameters, >>> and it should only be done when there’s some clear value. Since the >>> overhead of having an unused parameter is ~zero, in my opinion this occurs >>> only when we really need the operator to consider the semantic impact of >>> its deprecation. >>> >>> >>> >>> We should never break minor upgrades, but we shouldn’t break any upgrade >>> unnecessarily. >>> >>> >>> >>> I wonder if we should introduce a compile time check that validates config >>> compatibility with prior versions, to avoid this in future. >>> >>> >>> >>> From: Dinesh Joshi >>> Date: Saturday, 12 February 2022 at 00:09 >>> To: dev@cassandra.apache.org >>> Subject: Re: [RELEASE] Apache Cassandra 4.0.2 released >>> >>> We should also have deprecation guidance in Config.java. This will help >>> when anybody is making changes in the future. >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> On Feb 11, 2022, at 3:07 PM, Ekaterina Dimitrova >>> wrote: >>> >>> >>> >>> Note taken, I had to document only in 4.0.x that those are placeholder. I >>> just opened ticket to fix that - CASSANDRA-17377. I am going to submit a >>> patch soon >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 17:44, Jeff Jirsa wrote: >>> >>> We don't HAVE TO remove the Config.java entry - we can mark it as >>> deprecated and ignored and remove it in a future version (and you could >>> update Config.java to log a message about having a deprecated config >>> option). It's a much better operator experience: log for a major version, >>> then remove in the next. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2022 at 2:41 PM Ekaterina Dimitrova >>> wrote: >>> >>> This had to be removed in 4.0 but it wasn’t. The patch mentioned did it to >>> fix a bug that gives impression those work. Confirmed with Benedict on the >>> ticket. >>> >>> >>> >>> I agree I absolutely had to document it better, a ticket for documentation >>> was opened but it slipped from my mind with this emergency release this >>> week. It is unfortunate it is still in our backlog after the ADOC migration. >>> >>> >>> >>> Note taken. I truly apologize and I am going to prioritize CASSANDRA-17135. >>> Let me know if there is anything else I can/should do at this point. >>> >>> >>> >>> On Fri, 11 Feb 2022 at 17:26, Erick Ramirez >>> wrote: >>> >>> (moved dev@ to BCC) >>> >>> >>> >>> It looks like the otc_coalescing_strategy config key is no longer supported >>> in cassandra.yaml in 4.0.2, despite this not being mentioned anywhere in >>> CHANGES.txt or NEWS.txt. >>> >>> >>> >>> James, you're right -- it was removed by
