> I believe it's original intention to be just about CircleCI.
It was but fwiw I'm good w/us exploring adjacent things regarding CI here. I'm
planning on deep diving on the thread tomorrow and distilling a snapshot of the
work we have a consensus on for circle and summarizing here so we don't los
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 at 22:07, Derek Chen-Becker
wrote:
> Would the preclusion of non-committers also prevent us from configuring
> Jenkins to auto-test on PR independent of who opens it?
>
> One of my current concerns is that we're maintaining 2x the CI for 1x the
> benefit, and I don't currently
Would the preclusion of non-committers also prevent us from configuring
Jenkins to auto-test on PR independent of who opens it?
One of my current concerns is that we're maintaining 2x the CI for 1x the
benefit, and I don't currently see an easy way to unify them (perhaps a
lack of imagination?). I
Sounds like great plan to me.
Just wanted to mention one caveat. Non-committers do not have access to ASF
CI. I do not think this will change. While no one of us ever said no to
push a patch for testing, it is good to have a good backup plan people can
do it themselves. Currently this is CircleCI.
On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 1:45 PM Josh McKenzie wrote:
>
> My high level hope is that we can:
>
> 1. Unstick mainline yearly releases (vote to accept circle results, make
> circle more robust <- WE ARE HERE)
> 2. Invest resources into the ASF CI environment to get it to being a viable
> replacemen
My high level hope is that we can:
1. Unstick mainline yearly releases (vote to accept circle results, make circle
more robust <- WE ARE HERE)
2. Invest resources into the ASF CI environment to get it to being a viable
replacement for circle (requirements for this qualification TBD)
3. Deprecate
>
> 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
Checked
- signing correct
- checksums are correct
- source art
>
> 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
Checked
- signing correct
- checksums are correct
- source art
>
> 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
Checked
- signing correct
- checksums are correct
- source a
+1 to all of these, especially improving CircleCI generation and
ergonomics. I still have a bunch of reservations around CircleCI in
general, but in the short term we can make it less painful (to a point).
Cheers,
Derek
On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 6:38 AM Ekaterina Dimitrova
wrote:
> Yes, they do.
I put together some minor fixes for the website dev documentation:
https://github.com/apache/cassandra-website/pull/179
I've tested these locally using the docker scripts, although antora seems
to create broken links and navigation (confirmed this behavior even without
my commit). I was told that
Since it might have sounded differently, most of the things I wrote are
something that CEP-21 _enables_ us to do.
But CEP-21 will just (more or less) make cluster operations consistent. The
rest of the things - are just features that we will implement on top of it. We
will need people to adopt
Right, all of the things you describe will be possible post CEP-21, just not
immediately. My point is that CEP-21 has a specific scope and a lot of the
great planned improvements necessarily fall outside of that.
> On 20 Oct 2022, at 15:42, Alex Petrov wrote:
>
> > by default C* does prohibit
> by default C* does prohibit concurrent bootstraps (behaviour which can be
> overridden with the cassandra.consistent.rangemovement system property). But
> there's nothing to stop you fully bootstrapping additional nodes in series,
> then removing them in the same way.
I think there are multip
> Add A' to the cluster with the same keyspace as A.
Can you clarify what you mean here?
> Currently these operations have to be performed in sequence. My
> understanding is that you can't add more than one node at a time.
To ensure consistency guarantees are honoured, by default C* does pro
My understanding of our process is (assuming we have 3 nodes A,B,C):
- Add A' to the cluster with the same keyspace as A.
- Remove A from the cluster.
- Add B' to the cluster
- Remove B from the cluster
- Add C' to the cluster
- Remove C from the cluster.
Currently these operati
I'm not sure I 100% understand the question, but the things covered in CEP-21
won't enable you to as an operator to bootstrap all your new nodes without
fully joining, then perform an atomic CAS to replace the existing members.
CEP-21 alone also won't solve all cross-version streaming issues, wh
Yes, they do. This is the only test suite that gets max resources with -m.
Probably you had some other issue Berenguer as I can confirm I was running
them successfully these days
On Thu, 20 Oct 2022 at 6:54, Brandon Williams wrote:
> They passed with -m for me recently.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Brand
After CEP-21 would it be possible to take a cluster of 6 nodes, spin up 6
new nodes to duplicate the 6 existing nodes and then spin down the original
6 nodes. Basically, I am thinking of the case where a cluster is running
version x.y.z and want to run x.y.z+1, can they spin up an equal number of
They passed with -m for me recently.
Kind Regards,
Brandon
On Thu, Oct 20, 2022 at 12:03 AM Berenguer Blasi
wrote:
>
> Can python upgrade tests be ran without -h? Last time I tried iirc they fail
> on -m
>
> On 20/10/22 4:11, Ekaterina Dimitrova wrote:
>
> Thank you Josh. Glad to see that our C
Hi Ekaterina
Thanks for the suggestion! Looks like documentation is a hot topic so great
there are a few opportunities to get involved. :-)
Thanks
Sharan
On 2022/10/19 15:06:23 Ekaterina Dimitrova wrote:
> One more idea, I was looking to update the What’s new page - a few links to
> docs or blo
Hi Paulo
Great to meet you at ApacheCon! And thanks for this suggestion - it's on my
list :-)
Thanks
Sharan
On 2022/10/19 14:37:26 Paulo Motta wrote:
> Welcome Sharan! :)
>
> One of the features that is going to be released in 4.1 is the ability to
> add TTL to snapshots, but this hasn't been
Hi Josh
Excellent and thanks for this. I'll take a look.
Thanks
Sharan
On 2022/10/18 20:35:50 Josh McKenzie wrote:
> Hey Sharan! Documentation is near and dear to my heart; the longer I spend on
> this project the more I think it's one of the higher leverage things we can
> invest our energy i
23 matches
Mail list logo
