Looking at those tickets in all three of them the “is this critical to fix” question came up in the JIRA discussion and it was decided that they were indeed critical enough to commit to 2.1.
> On Jul 18, 2016, at 11:47 AM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: > > We're at the stage of the release cycle where we should be committing > critical fixes only to the 2.1 branch. Many people depend on 2.1 working > reliably and it's not worth the risk of introducing regressions for (e.g.) > performance improvements. > > I think some of the patches committed so far for 2.1.16 do not meet this > bar and should be reverted. I include a summary of what people have to > live with if we leave them unfixed: > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11349 > Repair suffers false-negative tree mismatches and overstreams data. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10433 > Reduced performance on inserts (and reads?) (for Thrift clients only?) > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12030 > Reduced performance on reads for workloads with range tombstones > > Anyone want to make a case that these are more critical than they appear > and should not be reverted? > > -- > Jonathan Ellis > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com > @spyced
