IR patch is up for review https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18962
> On Oct 24, 2023, at 3:15 PM, David Capwell wrote:
>
> I sat down to add IR messages to the mix… given how positive the feedback was
> for other repair messages I assume people are still ok with this new IR work
>
I sat down to add IR messages to the mix… given how positive the feedback was
for other repair messages I assume people are still ok with this new IR work
going to 5.0 as well, if not please let me know here (will send a patch
tomorrow).
Once I send out the patch 100% of repair messages have re
Thanks all for the feedback! The patch has 2 +1s on trunk and back ported to
5.0, making sure it’s stable now; I plan to merge early this week.
> On Sep 21, 2023, at 2:07 PM, Ekaterina Dimitrova
> wrote:
>
> +1 from me too. Moreover, this work has started as part of the test efforts
> and id
+1 from me too. Moreover, this work has started as part of the test efforts
and identifying weak points during the 4.0 testing, if I recall correctly.
5.0 sounds like a good place to land. Thank you David and everyone else
involved for your efforts!
On Thu, 21 Sep 2023 at 1:01, Berenguer Blasi
wr
+1 I agree with Brandon. It's more like a bug imo.
On 20/9/23 21:42, Caleb Rackliffe wrote:
+1 on a 5.0 backport
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 2:26 PM Brandon Williams wrote:
I think it could be argued that not retrying messages is a bug, I am
+1 on including this in 5.0.
Kind Regards,
+1 on a 5.0 backport
On Wed, Sep 20, 2023 at 2:26 PM Brandon Williams wrote:
> I think it could be argued that not retrying messages is a bug, I am
> +1 on including this in 5.0.
>
> Kind Regards,
> Brandon
>
> On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:16 PM David Capwell wrote:
> >
> > To try to get repair mo
I think it could be argued that not retrying messages is a bug, I am
+1 on including this in 5.0.
Kind Regards,
Brandon
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 1:16 PM David Capwell wrote:
>
> To try to get repair more stable, I added optional retry logic (patch is
> still in review) to a handful of critical r
I support including this in 5.0.
This looks to me like a significant correctness and stabilization effort, very
similar to other large bodies of work we merged in post freeze for testing and
stabilizing 4.0.
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023, at 5:42 PM, Chris Lohfink wrote:
> I absolutely love the idea of
I absolutely love the idea of this being in 5.0, I am +1 for what it
is worth
On Tue, Sep 19, 2023 at 4:04 PM David Capwell wrote:
> To try to get repair more stable, I added optional retry logic (patch is
> still in review) to a handful of critical repair verbs. This patch is
> disabled by def
To try to get repair more stable, I added optional retry logic (patch is still
in review) to a handful of critical repair verbs. This patch is disabled by
default but allows you to opt-in to retries so ephemeral issues don’t cause a
repair to fail after running for a long time (assuming they re
10 matches
Mail list logo
