You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@cassandra.apache.org by Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com> on 2016/11/30 10:41:59 UTC

Cassandra 2.x Stability

Hi Everyone,

I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).

So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
don't require any new features available in 2.2).

Thanks!

Shalom Sagges
DBA
T: +972-74-700-4035
<http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
<http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
<https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>

-- 
This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. 
If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of the 
addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this 
message or any information herein. 
If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender 
immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.

RE: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Joaquin Alzola <Jo...@lebara.com>.
On the cassandra web itself.

http://cassandra.apache.org/download/

From: James Rothering [mailto:jrothering@codojo.me]
Sent: 07 December 2016 00:50
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Is there an official notification of these EOL dates somewhere?

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:38 AM, kurt Greaves <ku...@instaclustr.com>> wrote:
Latest release in 2.2. 2.1 is borderline EOL and from my experience 2.2 is quite stable and has some handy bugfixes that didn't actually make it into 2.1

On 30 November 2016 at 10:41, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>> wrote:
Hi Everyone,

I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).

So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm don't require any new features available in 2.2).

Thanks!

[https://signature.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/lp_logo.png]

Shalom Sagges

DBA

T: +972-74-700-4035<tel:+972%2074-700-4035>

[https://signature.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/LinkedIn.png]<http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748>

[https://signature.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/Twitter.png]<http://twitter.com/liveperson>

[https://signature.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/Facebook.png]<http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc>


We Create Meaningful Connections


[https://signature.s3.amazonaws.com/2015/banners/idc-email-sig.png]<https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>



This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this message or any information herein.
If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.


This email is confidential and may be subject to privilege. If you are not the intended recipient, please do not copy or disclose its content but contact the sender immediately upon receipt.

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by James Rothering <jr...@codojo.me>.
Is there an official notification of these EOL dates somewhere?

On Wed, Nov 30, 2016 at 4:38 AM, kurt Greaves <ku...@instaclustr.com> wrote:

> Latest release in 2.2. 2.1 is borderline EOL and from my experience 2.2 is
> quite stable and has some handy bugfixes that didn't actually make it into
> 2.1
>
> On 30 November 2016 at 10:41, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
>> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
>> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
>> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
>> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>>
>> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
>> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
>> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Shalom Sagges
>> DBA
>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>>
>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>
>>
>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>> message or any information herein.
>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>
>
>

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Vladimir Yudovin <vl...@winguzone.com>.
You should also consider end of support term, as Cassandra page says:



Apache Cassandra 2.2 is supported until November 2016.

Apache Cassandra 2.1 is supported until November 2016 with critical fixes only



So 2.1 actually don't get any fixes, even critical.



Best regards, Vladimir Yudovin, 

Winguzone - Cloud Cassandra Hosting






---- On Wed, 30 Nov 2016 07:38:46 -0500 kurt Greaves &lt;kurt@instaclustr.com&gt; wrote ----




Latest release in 2.2. 2.1 is borderline EOL and from my experience 2.2 is quite stable and has some handy bugfixes that didn't actually make it into 2.1



On 30 November 2016 at 10:41, Shalom Sagges &lt;shaloms@liveperson.com&gt; wrote:

Hi Everyone, 



I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version. 

At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong). 



So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm don't require any new features available in 2.2). 



Thanks!




 
Shalom Sagges
 
DBA
 
T: +972-74-700-4035
 

 
 
 
 We Create Meaningful Connections
 
 

 











This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. 

If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this message or any information herein. 

If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by kurt Greaves <ku...@instaclustr.com>.
Latest release in 2.2. 2.1 is borderline EOL and from my experience 2.2 is
quite stable and has some handy bugfixes that didn't actually make it into
2.1

On 30 November 2016 at 10:41, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Shalom Sagges
> DBA
> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>
> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>
>
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
> message or any information herein.
> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>.
No worries.
I added some patches to these tickets after having tested them yesterday
with our production cluster.
I think this will be a huge step for MV stability.

Anybody welcome to post comments on them or give me a review:
CASSANDRA-12888, CASSANDRA-12905, CASSANDRA-12984

Thanks folks!

2016-12-01 19:14 GMT+01:00 Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com>:

> Ben, I just read through those two tickets. It's scarier than I thought.
> Thank you for all the investigations and comments.
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>
> wrote:
>
>> A little experience report on MVs:
>>
>> We use them in production (3.10-trunk) and they work really well on
>> normal read/write operations but streaming operations (bootstrap, repair,
>> rebuild, decommision) can kill your cluster and/or your nerves.
>> We will stay with MVs as we need them and want them.
>> I rolled out a patch on MV streaming on our production cluster a few
>> hours ago as we had problems with bootstrapping new nodes.
>>
>> Before:
>> - Error log was completely flooded with WTEs
>> - Bootstrap either failed due to exceptions or wasn't even close to
>> finish after 24h - it just did not work
>>
>> After
>> - Bootstrap finished without a single error log after less than 5:30h
>>
>> I started to roll out that patch to the whole cluster to see how repairs
>> are affected. Will keep you updated.
>>
>> There is no dedicated JIRA issue assigned as it addresses multiple
>> tickets like CASSANDRA-12905 + CASSANDRA-12888
>>
>>
>> 2016-12-01 16:21 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Haddad <jo...@jonhaddad.com>:
>>
>>> I agree with everything you just said, Kai.  I'd start a new project
>>> with 3.0.10.  I'd stay away from MVs though.
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:19 AM Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Just based on a few observations on this list. Not one week goes by
>>>> without people asking which release is the most stable on 3.x line. Folks
>>>> at instaclustr also provide their own 3.x fork for stability issues. etc
>>>>
>>>> We developers already have enough to think about. I really don't feel
>>>> like spending time researching which release of C* I should choose. So for
>>>> me, 2.2.x is the choice in production.
>>>>
>>>> That being said, I have nothing against 3.x. I do like its new storage
>>>> engine. If I start a brand new project today with zero previous C*
>>>> experience, I probably would choose 3.0.10 as my starting point. However if
>>>> I were to upgrade to 3.x, I would have to test it thoroughly in a dev
>>>> environment with real production load and monitor it very closely on
>>>> performance, compaction, repair, bootstrap, replacing etc. Data is simply
>>>> too important to take chances with.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hey Kai,
>>>>
>>>> Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick
>>>> 2.2.6 over 3.0?
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Shalom Sagges
>>>> DBA
>>>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748>
>>>> <http://twitter.com/liveperson> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We
>>>> Create Meaningful Connections
>>>>
>>>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick
>>>> it over 3.x for production.
>>>>
>>>> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com>
>>>> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
>>>> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable
>>>> it is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
>>>> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
>>>> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>>>>
>>>> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
>>>> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
>>>> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Shalom Sagges
>>>> DBA
>>>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748>
>>>> <http://twitter.com/liveperson> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We
>>>> Create Meaningful Connections
>>>>
>>>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>>>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>>>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>>>> message or any information herein.
>>>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>>>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>>>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>>>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>>>> message or any information herein.
>>>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>>>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>>
>>
>>
>> --
>> Benjamin Roth
>> Prokurist
>>
>> Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
>> Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
>> Phone +49 7161 304880-6 <+49%207161%203048806> · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
>> <+49%207161%203048801>
>> AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer
>>
>
>


-- 
Benjamin Roth
Prokurist

Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
Phone +49 7161 304880-6 · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com>.
Ben, I just read through those two tickets. It's scarier than I thought.
Thank you for all the investigations and comments.

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>
wrote:

> A little experience report on MVs:
>
> We use them in production (3.10-trunk) and they work really well on normal
> read/write operations but streaming operations (bootstrap, repair, rebuild,
> decommision) can kill your cluster and/or your nerves.
> We will stay with MVs as we need them and want them.
> I rolled out a patch on MV streaming on our production cluster a few hours
> ago as we had problems with bootstrapping new nodes.
>
> Before:
> - Error log was completely flooded with WTEs
> - Bootstrap either failed due to exceptions or wasn't even close to finish
> after 24h - it just did not work
>
> After
> - Bootstrap finished without a single error log after less than 5:30h
>
> I started to roll out that patch to the whole cluster to see how repairs
> are affected. Will keep you updated.
>
> There is no dedicated JIRA issue assigned as it addresses multiple tickets
> like CASSANDRA-12905 + CASSANDRA-12888
>
>
> 2016-12-01 16:21 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Haddad <jo...@jonhaddad.com>:
>
>> I agree with everything you just said, Kai.  I'd start a new project with
>> 3.0.10.  I'd stay away from MVs though.
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:19 AM Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Just based on a few observations on this list. Not one week goes by
>>> without people asking which release is the most stable on 3.x line. Folks
>>> at instaclustr also provide their own 3.x fork for stability issues. etc
>>>
>>> We developers already have enough to think about. I really don't feel
>>> like spending time researching which release of C* I should choose. So for
>>> me, 2.2.x is the choice in production.
>>>
>>> That being said, I have nothing against 3.x. I do like its new storage
>>> engine. If I start a brand new project today with zero previous C*
>>> experience, I probably would choose 3.0.10 as my starting point. However if
>>> I were to upgrade to 3.x, I would have to test it thoroughly in a dev
>>> environment with real production load and monitor it very closely on
>>> performance, compaction, repair, bootstrap, replacing etc. Data is simply
>>> too important to take chances with.
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hey Kai,
>>>
>>> Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick
>>> 2.2.6 over 3.0?
>>>
>>>
>>> Shalom Sagges
>>> DBA
>>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
>>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>>>
>>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick
>>> it over 3.x for production.
>>>
>>> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:
>>>
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>
>>> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
>>> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
>>> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
>>> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
>>> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>>>
>>> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
>>> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
>>> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Shalom Sagges
>>> DBA
>>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
>>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>>>
>>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>>
>>>
>>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>>> message or any information herein.
>>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>>> message or any information herein.
>>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>
>
> --
> Benjamin Roth
> Prokurist
>
> Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
> Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
> Phone +49 7161 304880-6 <+49%207161%203048806> · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
> <+49%207161%203048801>
> AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer
>

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Benjamin Roth <be...@jaumo.com>.
A little experience report on MVs:

We use them in production (3.10-trunk) and they work really well on normal
read/write operations but streaming operations (bootstrap, repair, rebuild,
decommision) can kill your cluster and/or your nerves.
We will stay with MVs as we need them and want them.
I rolled out a patch on MV streaming on our production cluster a few hours
ago as we had problems with bootstrapping new nodes.

Before:
- Error log was completely flooded with WTEs
- Bootstrap either failed due to exceptions or wasn't even close to finish
after 24h - it just did not work

After
- Bootstrap finished without a single error log after less than 5:30h

I started to roll out that patch to the whole cluster to see how repairs
are affected. Will keep you updated.

There is no dedicated JIRA issue assigned as it addresses multiple tickets
like CASSANDRA-12905 + CASSANDRA-12888


2016-12-01 16:21 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Haddad <jo...@jonhaddad.com>:

> I agree with everything you just said, Kai.  I'd start a new project with
> 3.0.10.  I'd stay away from MVs though.
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:19 AM Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Just based on a few observations on this list. Not one week goes by
>> without people asking which release is the most stable on 3.x line. Folks
>> at instaclustr also provide their own 3.x fork for stability issues. etc
>>
>> We developers already have enough to think about. I really don't feel
>> like spending time researching which release of C* I should choose. So for
>> me, 2.2.x is the choice in production.
>>
>> That being said, I have nothing against 3.x. I do like its new storage
>> engine. If I start a brand new project today with zero previous C*
>> experience, I probably would choose 3.0.10 as my starting point. However if
>> I were to upgrade to 3.x, I would have to test it thoroughly in a dev
>> environment with real production load and monitor it very closely on
>> performance, compaction, repair, bootstrap, replacing etc. Data is simply
>> too important to take chances with.
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> Hey Kai,
>>
>> Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick
>> 2.2.6 over 3.0?
>>
>>
>> Shalom Sagges
>> DBA
>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>>
>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick
>> it over 3.x for production.
>>
>> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:
>>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
>> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
>> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
>> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
>> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>>
>> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
>> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
>> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Shalom Sagges
>> DBA
>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>>
>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>
>>
>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>> message or any information herein.
>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>
>>
>>
>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>> message or any information herein.
>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>
>>
>>


-- 
Benjamin Roth
Prokurist

Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
Phone +49 7161 304880-6 · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Luke Jolly <lu...@getadmiral.com>.
I have been using 3.0.x in moderate load production on a 8 node cluster
since 3.0.5.  I agree with start at 3.0.X.  Starting a new project on a
version that just reached end of life is very hard to justify in my mind.

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016, 10:22 AM Jonathan Haddad <jo...@jonhaddad.com> wrote:

> I agree with everything you just said, Kai.  I'd start a new project with
> 3.0.10.  I'd stay away from MVs though.
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:19 AM Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> Just based on a few observations on this list. Not one week goes by
> without people asking which release is the most stable on 3.x line. Folks
> at instaclustr also provide their own 3.x fork for stability issues. etc
>
> We developers already have enough to think about. I really don't feel like
> spending time researching which release of C* I should choose. So for me,
> 2.2.x is the choice in production.
>
> That being said, I have nothing against 3.x. I do like its new storage
> engine. If I start a brand new project today with zero previous C*
> experience, I probably would choose 3.0.10 as my starting point. However if
> I were to upgrade to 3.x, I would have to test it thoroughly in a dev
> environment with real production load and monitor it very closely on
> performance, compaction, repair, bootstrap, replacing etc. Data is simply
> too important to take chances with.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey Kai,
>
> Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick
> 2.2.6 over 3.0?
>
>
> Shalom Sagges
> DBA
> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>
> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick it
> over 3.x for production.
>
> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Shalom Sagges
> DBA
> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>
> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>
>
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
> message or any information herein.
> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>
>
>
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
> message or any information herein.
> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>
>
> --


Luke Jolly
Senior Site Reliability Engineer
(850) 270-3243 <8502703243>
luke@getadmiral.com
getadmiral.com

How much are you losing to adblockers? Find out for free with Admiral
<http://getadmiral.com>.

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Jonathan Haddad <jo...@jonhaddad.com>.
I agree with everything you just said, Kai.  I'd start a new project with
3.0.10.  I'd stay away from MVs though.

On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:19 AM Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just based on a few observations on this list. Not one week goes by
> without people asking which release is the most stable on 3.x line. Folks
> at instaclustr also provide their own 3.x fork for stability issues. etc
>
> We developers already have enough to think about. I really don't feel like
> spending time researching which release of C* I should choose. So for me,
> 2.2.x is the choice in production.
>
> That being said, I have nothing against 3.x. I do like its new storage
> engine. If I start a brand new project today with zero previous C*
> experience, I probably would choose 3.0.10 as my starting point. However if
> I were to upgrade to 3.x, I would have to test it thoroughly in a dev
> environment with real production load and monitor it very closely on
> performance, compaction, repair, bootstrap, replacing etc. Data is simply
> too important to take chances with.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hey Kai,
>
> Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick
> 2.2.6 over 3.0?
>
>
> Shalom Sagges
> DBA
> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>
> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick it
> over 3.x for production.
>
> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:
>
> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Shalom Sagges
> DBA
> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>
> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>
>
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
> message or any information herein.
> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>
>
>
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
> message or any information herein.
> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>
>
>

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>.
Thanks a lot Kai!


Shalom Sagges
DBA
T: +972-74-700-4035
<http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
<http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
<https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>


On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 5:18 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Just based on a few observations on this list. Not one week goes by
> without people asking which release is the most stable on 3.x line. Folks
> at instaclustr also provide their own 3.x fork for stability issues. etc
>
> We developers already have enough to think about. I really don't feel like
> spending time researching which release of C* I should choose. So for me,
> 2.2.x is the choice in production.
>
> That being said, I have nothing against 3.x. I do like its new storage
> engine. If I start a brand new project today with zero previous C*
> experience, I probably would choose 3.0.10 as my starting point. However if
> I were to upgrade to 3.x, I would have to test it thoroughly in a dev
> environment with real production load and monitor it very closely on
> performance, compaction, repair, bootstrap, replacing etc. Data is simply
> too important to take chances with.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hey Kai,
>>
>> Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick
>> 2.2.6 over 3.0?
>>
>>
>> Shalom Sagges
>> DBA
>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>>
>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick
>>> it over 3.x for production.
>>>
>>> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>>
>>>> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
>>>> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable
>>>> it is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
>>>> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
>>>> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>>>>
>>>> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
>>>> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
>>>> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>>>>
>>>> Thanks!
>>>>
>>>> Shalom Sagges
>>>> DBA
>>>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748>
>>>> <http://twitter.com/liveperson> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We
>>>> Create Meaningful Connections
>>>>
>>>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>>>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>>>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>>>> message or any information herein.
>>>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>>>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>>>
>>>
>>
>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>> message or any information herein.
>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>
>
>

-- 
This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. 
If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of the 
addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this 
message or any information herein. 
If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender 
immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com>.
Just based on a few observations on this list. Not one week goes by without
people asking which release is the most stable on 3.x line. Folks at
instaclustr also provide their own 3.x fork for stability issues. etc

We developers already have enough to think about. I really don't feel like
spending time researching which release of C* I should choose. So for me,
2.2.x is the choice in production.

That being said, I have nothing against 3.x. I do like its new storage
engine. If I start a brand new project today with zero previous C*
experience, I probably would choose 3.0.10 as my starting point. However if
I were to upgrade to 3.x, I would have to test it thoroughly in a dev
environment with real production load and monitor it very closely on
performance, compaction, repair, bootstrap, replacing etc. Data is simply
too important to take chances with.


On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>
wrote:

> Hey Kai,
>
> Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick
> 2.2.6 over 3.0?
>
>
> Shalom Sagges
> DBA
> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>
> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick
>> it over 3.x for production.
>>
>> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi Everyone,
>>>
>>> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
>>> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
>>> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
>>> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
>>> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>>>
>>> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
>>> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
>>> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>>>
>>> Thanks!
>>>
>>> Shalom Sagges
>>> DBA
>>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
>>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>>>
>>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>>
>>>
>>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>>> message or any information herein.
>>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>>
>>
>
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
> message or any information herein.
> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Shalom Sagges <sh...@liveperson.com>.
Hey Kai,

Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick
2.2.6 over 3.0?


Shalom Sagges
DBA
T: +972-74-700-4035
<http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
<http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
<https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>


On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick it
> over 3.x for production.
>
> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Everyone,
>>
>> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
>> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
>> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
>> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
>> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>>
>> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
>> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
>> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>>
>> Thanks!
>>
>> Shalom Sagges
>> DBA
>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>>
>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>>
>>
>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
>> message or any information herein.
>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>>
>

-- 
This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. 
If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of the 
addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this 
message or any information herein. 
If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender 
immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.

Re: Cassandra 2.x Stability

Posted by Kai Wang <de...@gmail.com>.
I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick it
over 3.x for production.

On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <sh...@liveperson.com> wrote:

> Hi Everyone,
>
> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version.
> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it
> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta
> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the
> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong).
>
> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to
> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm
> don't require any new features available in 2.2).
>
> Thanks!
>
> Shalom Sagges
> DBA
> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035>
> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson>
> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections
>
> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig>
>
>
> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information.
> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of
> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this
> message or any information herein.
> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender
> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you.
>