Re: [DISCUSSION] Workshop idea

[Carlos Rolo]

I would love this idea!
I'm currently working on upgrading cluster to 4.0 (testing) and if needed I
can talk about that.

[image: Pythian]
*Carlos Rolo* | Big Data Consultant | [image: LinkedIn]
<https://www.linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo/>
*m* +351 918 918 100
r...@pythian.com   *www.pythian.com*
<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pythian.com&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNHhR4YJfBb19QxglicHut6aTAjXyQ>
[image: Pythian]
<https://www.google.com/url?q=https%3A%2F%2Fwww.pythian.com%2Femail-footer-click&sa=D&sntz=1&usg=AFQjCNF7Ld7zJGpBUtvj3Lum--bqwUvvog>


On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 5:36 PM Charles Cao  wrote:

> +1. Great idea. A virtual meetup, Introduction to Cassandra 4.0, will
> help users try and test 4.0.
>
> ~Charles
>
> On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 9:26 AM Ekaterina Dimitrova
>  wrote:
> >
> > Hi Nate, all,
> > I was thinking about a 1 hour online talk on 4.0, new features, testing,
> etc. I guess it can be also recorded and distributed for those who missed
> the live session. Slides also could be added to slide share.
> > As you mentioned demos, that sounds good to me if people have the time
> for demos to be recorded and distributed.
> >
> > Best regards,
> > Ekaterina
> >
> > > On 27 Jul 2020, at 21:29, Nate McCall  wrote:
> > >
> > > This is a really interesting idea, particularly given that at this
> point in
> > > our release cycle previously, there would be demos/roadshows happening
> at
> > > meetups etc. that we just cant do these days in most places now.
> > >
> > > What is your thinking on format?
> > >
> > > +1 in general though - that goes for anybody that wants to do something
> > > like this.
> > >
> > >
> > >
> > > On Tue, Jul 28, 2020 at 12:21 PM Ekaterina Dimitrova <
> e.dimitr...@gmail.com>
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hello everyone,
> > >> I hope everyone is doing well in these weird pandemic times.
> > >>
> > >> I am super excited to see people already testing 4.0 Beta and coming
> back
> > >> with feedback. To me the user experience is one of the most important
> > >> factors for a successful release.
> > >> While talking about ApacheCon™ last week, an idea was born. How does
> the
> > >> community feel about having a workshop on Cassandra 4.0 in August?
> > >> Why do I find this idea great?
> > >> 1) Let’s keep the momentum going and try to get the attention of even
> more
> > >> users to start testing.
> > >> 2) ApacheCon™ is only at the end of September, so we can also use the
> > >> opportunity to heat up before the conference.
> > >> There is no plan or anything at this point. Just an idea was born and
> I am
> > >> excited to share it with all of you and get some
> > >> feedback/suggestions/criticism.
> > >> How does the rest of you feel about it?
> > >> Looking forward to hearing from you.
> > >> Best regards,
> > >> Ekaterina
> > >> -
> > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >>
> > >>
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >
>
> -
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
>
>

-- 


--

Re: Roadmap for 4.0

[Carlos Rolo]

I will commit time to test (not a full validation, but at least go through
operations) regardless of the date. Both seems fine to me.

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant / Datastax Certified Architect / Cassandra MVP

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: @cjrolo | Skype: cjr2k3 | Linkedin:
*linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +351 918 918 100
www.pythian.com

On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 11:00 PM, Joseph Lynch 
wrote:

> The Netflix team prefers September as well. We don't have time before that
> to do a full certification (e2e and performance testing), but can probably
> work it into end of Q3 / start of Q4.
>
> I personally hope that the extra time gives us as a community a chance to
> come up with a compelling user story for why users would want to upgrade. I
> don't feel we have one right now.
>
> -Joey
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 2:51 PM, Ariel Weisberg  wrote:
>
> > Hi,
> >
> > +1 to September 1st. I know I will have much better availability then.
> >
> > Ariel
> > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018, at 5:15 PM, Sankalp Kohli wrote:
> > > +1 with Sept 1st as I am seeing willingness for people to test it after
> > it
> > >
> > > > On Apr 12, 2018, at 13:59, Ben Bromhead  wrote:
> > > >
> > > > While I would prefer earlier, if Sept 1 gets better buy-in and we can
> > have
> > > > broader commitment to testing. I'm super happy with that. As Nate
> said,
> > > > having a solid line to work towards is going to help massively.
> > > >
> > > > On Thu, Apr 12, 2018 at 4:07 PM Nate McCall 
> > wrote:
> > > >
> > > >>> If we push it to Sept 1 freeze, I'll personally spend a lot of time
> > > >> testing.
> > > >>>
> > > >>> What can I do to help convince the Jun1 folks that Sept1 is
> > acceptable?
> > > >>
> > > >> I can come around to that. At this point, I really just want us to
> > > >> have a date we can start talking to/planning around.
> > > >>
> > > >> 
> -
> > > >> To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > > >> For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> > > >>
> > > >> --
> > > > Ben Bromhead
> > > > CTO | Instaclustr 
> > > > +1 650 284 9692
> > > > Reliability at Scale
> > > > Cassandra, Spark, Elasticsearch on AWS, Azure, GCP and Softlayer
> > >
> > > -
> > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> > >
> >
> > -
> > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
> > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
> >
> >
>

-- 


--

Re: State of Materialized Views

[Carlos Rolo]

We have a couple of big deployments with MV in production, I will try to
get some help in form of testing and validation. Will do my best to try and
contribute to the codebase too.



Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant / Datastax Certified Architect / Cassandra MVP

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: @cjrolo | Skype: cjr2k3 | Linkedin:
*linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +351 918 918 100
www.pythian.com

On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 3:48 PM, Josh McKenzie  wrote:

> >
> > Who is "we" in this case?
>
>
> Initial contributors (myself + Jake, Carl's no longer active on the
> project), Zhao, Andres, Paulo, Sylvain, etc. The people who are publicly,
> actively working on MV issues atm.
>
> On Mon, Jul 24, 2017 at 9:46 AM, benjamin roth  wrote:
>
> > Hi Josh,
> >
> > Who is "we" in this case?
> >
> > Best,
> > Ben
> >
> > 2017-07-24 15:41 GMT+02:00 Josh McKenzie :
> >
> > > >
> > > > The initial contributors turned their back on MVs
> > >
> > >
> > > We're working on the following MV-related issues in the 4.0 time-frame:
> > > CASSANDRA-13162
> > > CASSANDRA-13547
> > > CASSANDRA-13127
> > > CASSANDRA-13409
> > > CASSANDRA-12952
> > > CASSANDRA-13069
> > > CASSANDRA-12888
> > >
> > > We're also keeping our eye on CASSANDRA-13657
> > >
> > > This is by no means an exhaustive list, but we're hoping it'll help
> take
> > > care of some of the more pressing / critical issues with the feature.
> > > Automated de-normalization on a Dynamo EC architecture is a Hard
> Problem.
> > >
> > >
> > > On Thu, Jul 20, 2017 at 9:56 PM, kurt greaves 
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > I'm going to do my best to review all the changes Zhao is making
> under
> > > > CASSANDRA-11500  jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11500
> > >,
> > > > but yeah definitely need a committer nominee as well. On that note,
> > Zhao
> > > is
> > > > going to try address a lot of the current issues I listed above in
> > > #11500.​
> > > > Thanks Zhao!
> > > >
> > >
> >
>

-- 


--

Re: NGCC?

[Carlos Rolo]

I might try to get some internal support for sponsorship if needed.

Would love for a NGCC event to happen.

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant / Datastax Certified Architect / Cassandra MVP

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: @cjrolo | Skype: cjr2k3 | Linkedin:
*linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +351 918 918 100
www.pythian.com

On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 9:28 PM, Ben Bromhead  wrote:

> +1
>
> On Fri, 2 Jun 2017 at 13:17 Eric Evans  wrote:
>
> > On Fri, Jun 2, 2017 at 2:34 PM, Ben Bromhead 
> wrote:
> > > We are more than happy to donate some resources (both people and
> > materials)
> > > to putting on NGCC.
> > >
> > > I would suggest some sort of committee of folks who are willing to do
> the
> > > groundwork and who act as the executive so it gets done :)
> >
> > Gary Dusbabek and myself are both willing to shoulder the grunt work
> > of organizing this.
> >
> > Since we're both in San Antonio, that's the location that would be
> > most practical for us.  It's also easy to get to, centrally located,
> > and the weather should be fantastic that time of year.
> >
> > We were thinking we'd put together some options for venue, and propose
> > some dates, and circle back to the list in search of consensus.
> >
> > If this seems reasonable for now, then we'll get back to everyone with
> > more info in a weeks time.
> >
> > --
> > Eric Evans
> > john.eric.ev...@gmail.com
> >
> --
> Ben Bromhead
> CTO | Instaclustr 
> +1 650 284 9692
> Managed Cassandra / Spark on AWS, Azure and Softlayer
>

-- 


--

Re: Slowness in C* cluster after implementing multiple network interface configuration.

[Carlos Rolo]

It might be a bug.
Cassandra, AFAIK, scans those files for changes and updates the topology
(So you don't need a restart if you change the files). It might be the case
that the absence of the file, is still noticed by Cassandra even if it is
not really used.

I can do a small test to confirm, if so, it is a question of "expected
behaviour" (as in, always leave the file there) vs Bug (It shouldn't care
for files it doesn't use).

If you can always reproduce, feel free to Open a JIRA.

Thanks for the description.

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant / Datastax Certified Architect / Cassandra MVP

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: @cjrolo | Skype: cjr2k3 | Linkedin:
*linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +351 918 918 100
www.pythian.com

On Wed, May 24, 2017 at 8:12 AM, Prakash Chauhan <
prakash.chau...@ericsson.com> wrote:

> Hi All,
>
>
>
> We have a new observation.
>
>
>
> Earlier for implementing multiple network interfaces, we were deleting
> *cassandra-topologies.properties* in the last step (Steps are mentioned
> in mail trail).
>
> The rationale was that because we are using altogether a new
> endpoint_snitch , we don’t require cassandra-topologies.properties file
> anymore.
>
>
>
> Now we have observed that if we don’t delete cassandra-topologies.properties,
> the slowness is not there in the cluster (Even with multiple restarts)
>
>
>
> Is there some relationship between *GossipingPropertyFileSnitch* and
> *cassandra-topologies.properties* ?
>
>
>
> As per my knowledge,  *cassandra-topologies.properties* file is only used
> as a fallback while doing snitch migration. If that’s the case, why does
> Cassandra becomes slow with time ( and after doing multiple restarts )
> after deleting cassandra-topologies.properties ?
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Prakash Chauhan.
>
>
>
> *From:* Cogumelos Maravilha [mailto:cogumelosmaravi...@sapo.pt]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, May 24, 2017 12:15 AM
> *To:* u...@cassandra.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: Slowness in C* cluster after implementing multiple network
> interface configuration.
>
>
>
> Hi,
>
> I never used version 2.0.x but I think port 7000 isn't enough.
>
> Try enable:
>
> 7000 inter-node
>
> 7001 SSL inter-node
>
> 9042 CQL
>
> 9160 Thrift is enable in that version
>
>
>
> And
>
> In Cassandra.yaml, add property “broadcast_address”.  = local ipv4
>
> In Cassandra.yaml, change “listen_address” to private IP. = local ipv4
>
>
>
> As a starting point.
>
>
>
> Cheers.
>
>
>
> On 22-05-2017 12:36, Prakash Chauhan wrote:
>
> Hi All ,
>
>
>
> Need Help !!!
>
>
>
> *Setup Details:*
>
> Cassandra 2.0.14
>
> Geo Red setup
>
> · DC1 - 3 nodes
>
> · DC2 - 3 nodes
>
>
>
>
>
> We were trying to implement multiple network interfaces with Cassandra
> 2.0.14
>
> After doing all the steps mentioned in DataStax doc
> http://docs.datastax.com/en/archived/cassandra/2.0/
> cassandra/configuration/configMultiNetworks.html, we observed that nodes
> were not able to see each other (checked using nodetool status).
>
>
>
> To resolve this issue, we followed the comment
> 
> mentioned in the JIRA : CASSANDRA-9748
> 
>
>
>
> Exact steps that we followed are :
>
> 
>
> *1.   *Stop Cassandra
>
> *2.   *Add rule to “iptables” to forward all packets on the public
> interface to the private interface.
>
>
>
> COMMAND: # iptables -t nat -A PREROUTING -p tcp -m tcp -d 
> --dport 7000 -j DNAT --to-destination :7000
>
>
>
> *3.   *In Cassandra.yaml, add property “broadcast_address”.
>
> *4.   *In Cassandra.yaml, change “listen_address” to private IP.
>
> *5.   *Clear the data from directory “peers”.
>
> *6.   *Change Snitch to GossipingPropertyFileSnitch.
>
> *7.   *Append following property to the file 
> “/etc/cassandra/conf/cassandra-env.sh”
> to purge gossip state.
>
> JVM_OPTS="$JVM_OPTS -Dcassandra.load_ring_state=false"
>
>
>
> *8.   *Start Cassandra
>
> *9.   *After node has been started, remove following property from
> the file “/etc/cassandra/conf/cassandra-env.sh” (previously added in step
> 7)
>
> JVM_OPTS="$JVM_OPTS -Dcassandra.load_ring_state=false"
>
> *10.   *Delete file “/etc/cassandra/conf/cassandra-topology.properties”
>
>
>
>
>
> Now We have an observation that after multiple restarts of Cassandra on
> multiple nodes, slowness is observed in the cluster.
>
> The problem gets resolved when we revert the steps mentioned above.
>
>
>
> *Do u think there is any step that can cause the problem ?*
>
> We are suspecting Step 2(iptable rule) but not very sure about it.
>
>
>
>
>
> Regards,
>
> Prakash Chauhan.
>
>
>

-- 


--

Re: Rough roadmap for 4.0

[Carlos Rolo]

No Cluster in tick-tock.

Actually reverted a couple to 3.0.x

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant / Datastax Certified Architect / Cassandra MVP

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: @cjrolo | Skype: cjr2k3 | Linkedin:
*linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +351 918 918 100
www.pythian.com

On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 10:20 PM, DuyHai Doan  wrote:

> Be very careful, there is a serious bug about AND/OR semantics, not solved
> yet and not going to be solved any soon:
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12674
>
> On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 7:32 PM, Jeff Jirsa 
> wrote:
>
> >
> > We’ll be voting in the very near future on timing of major releases and
> > release strategy. 4.0 won’t happen until that vote takes place.
> >
> > But since you asked, I have ONE tick/tock (3.9) cluster being qualified
> > for production because it needs SASI.
> >
> > - Jeff
> >
> > On 11/17/16, 9:59 AM, "Jonathan Haddad"  wrote:
> >
> > >I think it might be worth considering adopting the release strategy
> before
> > >4.0 release.  Are any PMC members putting tick tock in prod? Does anyone
> > >even trust it?  What's the downside of changing the release cycle
> > >independently from 4.0?
> > >
> > >On Thu, Nov 17, 2016 at 9:03 AM Jason Brown 
> wrote:
> > >
> > >Jason,
> > >
> > >That's a separate topic, but we will have a different vote on how the
> > >branching/release strategy should be for the future.
> > >
> > >On Thursday, November 17, 2016, jason zhao yang <
> > zhaoyangsingap...@gmail.com
> > >>
> > >wrote:
> > >
> > >> Hi,
> > >>
> > >> Will we still use tick-tock release for 4.x and 4.0.x ?
> > >>
> > >> Stefan Podkowinski >于2016年11月16日周三
> > >> 下午4:52写道：
> > >>
> > >> > From my understanding, this will also effect EOL dates of other
> > >branches.
> > >> >
> > >> > "We will maintain the 2.2 stability series until 4.0 is released,
> and
> > >3.0
> > >> > for six months after that.".
> > >> >
> > >> >
> > >> > On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 5:34 AM, Nate McCall  > >> > wrote:
> > >> >
> > >> > > Agreed. As long as we have a goal I don't see why we have to
> adhere
> > to
> > >> > > arbitrary date for 4.0.
> > >> > >
> > >> > > On Nov 16, 2016 1:45 PM, "Aleksey Yeschenko" <
> alek...@datastax.com
> > >> >
> > >> > wrote:
> > >> > >
> > >> > > > I’ll comment on the broader issue, but right now I want to
> > elaborate
> > >> on
> > >> > > > 3.11/January/arbitrary cutoff date.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Doesn’t matter what the original plan was. We should continue
> with
> > >> 3.X
> > >> > > > until all the 4.0 blockers have been
> > >> > > > committed - and there are quite a few of them remaining yet.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > So given all the holidays, and the tickets remaining, I’ll
> > >personally
> > >> > be
> > >> > > > surprised if 4.0 comes out before
> > >> > > > February/March and 3.13/3.14. Nor do I think it’s an issue.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > —
> > >> > > > AY
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On 16 November 2016 at 00:39:03, Mick Semb Wever (
> > >> > m...@thelastpickle.com 
> > >> > > )
> > >> > > > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > On 4 November 2016 at 13:47, Nate McCall  > >> > wrote:
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > Specifically, this should be "new stuff that could/will break
> > >> things"
> > >> > > > > given we are upping
> > >> > > > > the major version.
> > >> > > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > How does this co-ordinate with the tick-tock versioning¹ leading
> > up
> > >> to
> > >> > > the
> > >> > > > 4.0 release?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > To just stop tick-tock and then say yeehaa let's jam in all the
> > >> > breaking
> > >> > > > changes we really want seems to be throwing away some of the
> > learnt
> > >> > > wisdom,
> > >> > > > and not doing a very sane transition from tick-tock to
> > >> > > > features/testing/stable². I really hope all this is done in a
> way
> > >> that
> > >> > > > continues us down the path towards a stable-master.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > For example, are we fixing the release of 4.0 to November? or
> > >> > continuing
> > >> > > > tick-tocks until we complete the 4.0 roadmap? or starting the
> > >> > > > features/testing/stable branching approach with 3.11?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Background:
> > >> > > > ¹) Sylvain wrote in an earlier thread titled "A Home for 4.0"
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > And as 4.0 was initially supposed to come after 3.11, which is
> > >> > coming,
> > >> > > > it's probably time to have a home for those tickets.
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > ²) The new versioning scheme slated for 4.0, per the "Proposal -
> > >> 3.5.1"
> > >> > > > thread
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > > three branch plan with “features”, “testing”, and “stable”
> > >starting
> > >> > > with
> > >> > > > 4.0?
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > >
> > >> > > > Mick
> > >> > > >
> > >> > >
> > >> >
> > >>
> >
>

-- 


--

Re: Can I replace a 2.0.9 node with a 2.1.14 node in a cluster?

[Carlos Rolo]

Don't do that.

In any case an upgrade between 2.0.x and 2.1.x is not so complex and
difficult to do. And it is "downtime free". I would get the opportunity to
do a full cluster upgrade.

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant / Datastax Certified Architect / Cassandra MVP

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: @cjrolo | Skype: cjr2k3 | Linkedin:
*linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +351 918 918 100
www.pythian.com

On Thu, May 5, 2016 at 4:54 PM, Li, Guangxing 
wrote:

> Hi,
>
> due to internal infrastructure changes, we have to replace all nodes with
> new nodes. All the existing nodes are running Cassandra Community version
> 2.0.9. I was thinking may be this is also an opportunity for us to upgrade
> to Cassandra Community version 2.1.14. I hope I am not asking a crazy
> question: But can I replace a 2.0.9 node with a 2.1.14 node in the cluster,
> i.e. can 2.0.9 nodes and 2.1.14 nodes work peacefully together in a cluster
> if I replace 2.0.9 nodes with 2.1.14 nodes one by one?
>
> Thanks.
>
> George.
>

-- 


--

Re: Criteria for upgrading to 3.x releases in PROD

[Carlos Rolo]

My blog post regarding this:

https://www.pythian.com/blog/cassandra-version-production/

There is a choice for everyone, and explained.

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant / Datastax Certified Architect / Cassandra MVP

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: @cjrolo | Linkedin: *linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +351 91 891 81 00 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
www.pythian.com

On Mon, Apr 18, 2016 at 7:12 PM, Anuj Wadehra <
anujw_2...@yahoo.co.in.invalid> wrote:

> I am sorry but here, I am not expecting thousands to decide a stable
> version for my use case. I have a serious question about publishing some
> info on the Apache website. As dev list has active contributors, I posted
> it here. If not this forum, Whats the best way to put your suggestions
> regarding Apache content and initiate a meaningful and conclusive
> discussion thread?
>
> ThanksAnuj
>
> Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
>
>   On Mon, 18 Apr, 2016 at 11:27 PM, Michael Kjellman<
> mkjell...@internalcircle.com> wrote:   This is best for the users list.
> Test the releases yourself and then decide when it's ready for your use
> case, ops team, and organization. This is a personal decision and not one
> for *thousands* of others on this mailing list to make for you.
>
> best,
> kjellman
>
> > On Apr 18, 2016, at 10:54 AM, Anuj Wadehra
>  wrote:
> >
> > Hi All,
> > For last several months, the "most stable version" question pops up on
> the user mailing list and then people get all sorts of
> responses/suggestions..
> > If you are conservative go for x if adventurous y..
> > If you have good risk appetite go for x else y..
> > If you want features go for x else y..
> >
> > Unfortunately, all above responses dont help many users..but only
> reinforce the low confidence in latest releases.Who wants to be adventurous
> in Production? Who wants to test his risk appetite in Production? And who
> would want features for stability in Production? Not many..I am sure.
> > So my question is:
> > Would it be a wise decision to mention the "most stable/production
> ready" version (as it used to be before 3.x) on the Apache website till
> tick-tock release strategy evolves and matures?
> >  That will somewhat contradict the tick-tock philosphy of stable odd
> releases but would be more realistic as every big change needs time to
> stabilise. Its slightly unfair, if users are kept in confused state till
> the strategy matures and starts delivering solid stable builds.
> > I think the question is more appropriate in dev list so I have kept it
> here.
> > ThanksAnuj
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> >
> >  On Mon, 11 Apr, 2016 at 11:39 PM, Aleksey Yeschenko
> wrote:  The answer will depend on how conservative you are.
> >
> > The most conservative choice overall would be to go with the 2.2.x line.
> >
> > 3.0.x if you want to the new nice and shiny 3.0 things, but can tolerate
> some risk (the branch has a lot of relatively new core code, and hasn’t yet
> been tried out by as many users as the 2.x branch had).
> >
> > The latest odd 3.x if you want the shiniest (3.5 to be released soon,
> with features like the new SASI secondary indexes support). Also, there
> hasn’t yet been that much divergence between 3.0.x and 3.x, so risk levels
> are around the same, so long as you limit yourself to only the features
> present in 3.0.x.
> >
> > Either way, make sure to properly test whatever release you go for in
> staging first, as Michael says, and you’ll be alright.
> >
> > --
> > AY
> >
> > On 11 April 2016 at 18:42:31, Anuj Wadehra
> (anujw_2...@yahoo.co.in.invalid) wrote:
> >
> > Can someone help me with this one?
> > ThanksAnuj
> >
> > Sent from Yahoo Mail on Android
> >
> > On Sun, 10 Apr, 2016 at 11:07 PM, Anuj Wadehra
> wrote: Hi,
> > Tick-Tock release strategy in 3.x was a good intiative to ensure
> frequent & stable releases. While odd releases are supposed to get all the
> bug fixes and should be most stable, many people like me, who got used to
> the comforting "production ready/stable" tag on Apache website,  are still
> reluctant to take latest 3.x odd releases into production. I think the
> hesitation is somewhat justified as processes often take time to mature.
> > So here I would like to ask the experts, people who know the ground
> situation, people who actively develop it and manage it. Considering the
> current scenario, What should be a resonable criteria for taking 3.x
> releases in production?
> >
> >
> > ThanksAnuj
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >
>
>
>

-- 


--

Re: Modelling Cassandra's Availability

[Carlos Rolo]

Highly interesting! Thanks!

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: @cjrolo | Linkedin: *linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +351 91 891 81 00 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
www.pythian.com

On Tue, Oct 20, 2015 at 4:20 PM, Jonathan Ellis  wrote:

> Interesting work.  Thanks!
>
> On Mon, Oct 19, 2015 at 2:38 PM, CARLOS PEREZ 
> wrote:
>
> > Dear Cassandra Developers,
> >
> > I have recently published a paper about Cassandra's availability made in
> > the context of my PhD thesis. In this work I developed two different
> > theoretical models of Cassandra's availability. One under persistent
> > failures and another under transient failures. Using these models any
> > Cassandra user could obtain accurate values of availability under
> different
> > Cassandra configurations and use them to obtain the best configuration
> for
> > any Cassandra system in terms of availability.
> >
> > The results of this work can be found in the Journal of Parallel and
> > Distributed Computing with the title "Modeling the Availability of
> > Cassandra". This work has been made under the supervision of Professors
> > Jose Miguel-Alonso and Alexander Mendiburu from the University of the
> > Basque Country. You can read it in:
> >
> > http://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S074373151500129X
> >
> > or
> >
> > http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.jpdc.2015.08.001
> >
> > I hope you'll find it useful. Finally, I would like to thank all of you
> > for all your work in Cassandra and for all the information available
> about
> > Cassandra that has made possible this work.
> >
> > Best regards
> >
> > Carlos Perez-Miguel
> >
> >
> >
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Ellis
> Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> @spyced
>

-- 


--

Re: Nodes failed to bootstrap, no nodetool info but system.peer populated.

[Carlos Rolo]

Thanks also!

I did it, JAVA-761 <https://datastax-oss.atlassian.net/browse/JAVA-761>
created!

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: cjrolo | Linkedin: *linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
<http://linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo>*
Mobile: +31 6 159 61 814 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
www.pythian.com

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 6:48 PM, Sebastian Estevez <
sebastian.este...@datastax.com> wrote:

> I hit this issue today with the c# driver. I still think the drivers should
> handle peers inconsistencies better and maybe even output warnings about
> them.
>
> I opened CSHARP-296, @rolo, it's probably a good idea to open a similar one
> for java.
> On May 11, 2015 11:24 AM, "Carlos Rolo"  wrote:
>
> > Thanks!
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Carlos Juzarte Rolo
> > Cassandra Consultant
> >
> > Pythian - Love your data
> >
> > rolo@pythian | Twitter: cjrolo | Linkedin: *
> > linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
> > <http://linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo>*
> > Mobile: +31 6 159 61 814 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
> > www.pythian.com
> >
> > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Brandon Williams 
> > wrote:
> >
> > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9180
> > >
> > > On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:17 AM, Carlos Rolo  wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi all,
> > > >
> > > > I just wanted to know if this should be worth filling a bug or not
> > > > (Couldn't find any similar).
> > > >
> > > > I have a 3 node cluster (2.0.14). Decided to add 3 new ones. 2 failed
> > > > because of hardware failure (virtualized environment).
> > > >
> > > > The process was automated, so what was supposed to happen was:
> > > >
> > > > - Node 4 joins
> > > > - wait until status is UN and then 2min more
> > > > - Node 5 joins
> > > > - wait until status is UN and then 2min more
> > > > - Node 6 joins
> > > > - wait until status is UN and then 2min more
> > > >
> > > > What happened:
> > > > - Node 4 joins
> > > > - Wait...
> > > > - Node 5 joins
> > > > - VM fails while node is starting.
> > > > - VM 6 starts, no node with UN, waits 2min
> > > > - Node 6 joins
> > > > - VM fails while node is starting.
> > > >
> > > > After this, nodetool reports 4 nodes all UN
> > > > While trying an application (Datastax Java Driver 2.1) the debug log
> > > > reports that it tries to connect to Node 5 and 6 and fails.
> > > >
> > > > Checking system.peers table, I see both nodes there. So I tried
> > "nodetool
> > > > removenode " with the IDs in the table.
> > > >
> > > > It blows up with the following exception:
> > > > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException:
> > Host
> > > ID
> > > > not found.
> > > >
> > > > Then I decided to do the following:
> > > > DELETE from peers where ID in (ID1, ID2);
> > > >
> > > > All good, cluster still happy and driver not complaining anymore.
> > > > Is this expected behavior?
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > Regards,
> > > >
> > > > Carlos Juzarte Rolo
> > > > Cassandra Consultant
> > > >
> > > > Pythian - Love your data
> > > >
> > > > rolo@pythian | Twitter: cjrolo | Linkedin: *
> > > > linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
> > > > <http://linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo>*
> > > > Mobile: +31 6 159 61 814 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
> > > > www.pythian.com
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > > --
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > > >
> > >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

-- 


--

Re: Nodes failed to bootstrap, no nodetool info but system.peer populated.

[Carlos Rolo]

Thanks!

Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: cjrolo | Linkedin: *linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
<http://linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo>*
Mobile: +31 6 159 61 814 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
www.pythian.com

On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:29 PM, Brandon Williams  wrote:

> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9180
>
> On Mon, May 11, 2015 at 4:17 AM, Carlos Rolo  wrote:
>
> > Hi all,
> >
> > I just wanted to know if this should be worth filling a bug or not
> > (Couldn't find any similar).
> >
> > I have a 3 node cluster (2.0.14). Decided to add 3 new ones. 2 failed
> > because of hardware failure (virtualized environment).
> >
> > The process was automated, so what was supposed to happen was:
> >
> > - Node 4 joins
> > - wait until status is UN and then 2min more
> > - Node 5 joins
> > - wait until status is UN and then 2min more
> > - Node 6 joins
> > - wait until status is UN and then 2min more
> >
> > What happened:
> > - Node 4 joins
> > - Wait...
> > - Node 5 joins
> > - VM fails while node is starting.
> > - VM 6 starts, no node with UN, waits 2min
> > - Node 6 joins
> > - VM fails while node is starting.
> >
> > After this, nodetool reports 4 nodes all UN
> > While trying an application (Datastax Java Driver 2.1) the debug log
> > reports that it tries to connect to Node 5 and 6 and fails.
> >
> > Checking system.peers table, I see both nodes there. So I tried "nodetool
> > removenode " with the IDs in the table.
> >
> > It blows up with the following exception:
> > Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Host
> ID
> > not found.
> >
> > Then I decided to do the following:
> > DELETE from peers where ID in (ID1, ID2);
> >
> > All good, cluster still happy and driver not complaining anymore.
> > Is this expected behavior?
> >
> >
> >
> > Regards,
> >
> > Carlos Juzarte Rolo
> > Cassandra Consultant
> >
> > Pythian - Love your data
> >
> > rolo@pythian | Twitter: cjrolo | Linkedin: *
> > linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
> > <http://linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo>*
> > Mobile: +31 6 159 61 814 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
> > www.pythian.com
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> > --
> >
> >
> >
> >
>

-- 


--

Nodes failed to bootstrap, no nodetool info but system.peer populated.

[Carlos Rolo]

Hi all,

I just wanted to know if this should be worth filling a bug or not
(Couldn't find any similar).

I have a 3 node cluster (2.0.14). Decided to add 3 new ones. 2 failed
because of hardware failure (virtualized environment).

The process was automated, so what was supposed to happen was:

- Node 4 joins
- wait until status is UN and then 2min more
- Node 5 joins
- wait until status is UN and then 2min more
- Node 6 joins
- wait until status is UN and then 2min more

What happened:
- Node 4 joins
- Wait...
- Node 5 joins
- VM fails while node is starting.
- VM 6 starts, no node with UN, waits 2min
- Node 6 joins
- VM fails while node is starting.

After this, nodetool reports 4 nodes all UN
While trying an application (Datastax Java Driver 2.1) the debug log
reports that it tries to connect to Node 5 and 6 and fails.

Checking system.peers table, I see both nodes there. So I tried "nodetool
removenode " with the IDs in the table.

It blows up with the following exception:
Exception in thread "main" java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Host ID
not found.

Then I decided to do the following:
DELETE from peers where ID in (ID1, ID2);

All good, cluster still happy and driver not complaining anymore.
Is this expected behavior?



Regards,

Carlos Juzarte Rolo
Cassandra Consultant

Pythian - Love your data

rolo@pythian | Twitter: cjrolo | Linkedin: *linkedin.com/in/carlosjuzarterolo
*
Mobile: +31 6 159 61 814 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
www.pythian.com

-- 


--