> > We do have to cut another RC given the seriousness of CASSANDRA-16735 > though, right?
I do not disagree with that. I just would like to see us more precise with our expectations for releasing 4.0 GA, considering that we have already deeply tested the code. Would it make sense to say: "Let's give us 1 or 2 weeks to test RC-2. If no blocker shows up we can release 4.0 GA" ? Le mar. 15 juin 2021 à 12:25, bened...@apache.org <bened...@apache.org> a écrit : > That popularity line is a lot more stable than I would have expected, > honestly, given the huge shifts in the database landscape in the > intervening years. Though of course I’m sure we’d all rather it were > trending upwards. I think the release of 4.0 is likely to have minimal > impact on that, though – future project developments are going to determine > the project’s success, I expect. Plus maybe a new logo 😊 > > Still, not disputing the need to ship GA soon. We do have to cut another > RC given the seriousness of CASSANDRA-16735 though, right? > > > From: Benjamin Lerer <b.le...@gmail.com> > Date: Tuesday, 15 June 2021 at 11:14 > To: dev@cassandra.apache.org <dev@cassandra.apache.org> > Subject: Re: Are we ready for 4.0.0 (GA) ? > As the list of flaky tests was filtered out I wanted to add some > information about the test that revealed real issues. First there was a > mistake: only 3 of the issues were revealed by flaky tests. The other one > was a user report. > From the 3 remaining tickets only 2 were 4.0 bugs: CASSANDRA-16238 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16238> and > CASSANDRA-16668 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16668>(which was a pretty > hard to hit bug). > I totally agree that we found some real issues but the cost is pretty high: > 2 months of work for two 4.0 issues. > > I had a look this morning at how many users reported bugs on the RC-2 > release. Outside of the people deeply involved in this project there were > only 4 people reporting true issues and all of the issues were relatively > minors. > > I totally understand that we want to deliver a high quality product. I just > believe that we have to draw the line at some point. > The popularity of Cassandra has been going down for years ( > https://db-engines.com/en/ranking_trend/system/Cassandra). The project > might need that release more than any bug fix we can do. > > Le mar. 15 juin 2021 à 07:00, Dinesh Joshi <djos...@icloud.com.invalid> a > écrit : > > > Based on the release lifecycle[1], we should cut another RC until we > don’t > > find any blocking issues. > > > > Dinesh > > > > [1] > > > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/pages/viewpage.action?pageId=132320437 > > > > > > > > On Jun 14, 2021, at 9:05 PM, Scott Andreas <sc...@paradoxica.net> > wrote: > > > > > > A second RC is appropriate given the revert of CASSANDRA-15899 > > necessitated by the discovery of CASSANDRA-16735: Adding columns via > ALTER > > TABLE can generate corrupt sstables. > > > > > > Ekaterina and Benedict's statement regarding the true positive rate of > > flaky tests also shows the value of resolving these, and that it would be > > good to pay this down as far as we can reasonably do so without > > unnecessarily withholding the release. > > > > > > I do think it's possible that an RC2 build is a candidate for > nomination > > as our GA release. I don't think the RC2 phase needs to be drawn-out, but > > believe it would build confidence for the project to have positive > feedback > > from a release containing the fix for C-16735. If work paying down the > > remaining flaky tests surfaces a similar true positive rate, a third > build > > might be warranted, and it would be to the benefit of our users - but I > > don't think we're far off. > > > > > > I hope others are working to deploy the beta/RC builds and integrate + > > deploy changes from trunk into the releases they're deploying, as heavy > > contributors doing so provides us the best opportunity to catch these > > issues before our users do. > > > > > > We're getting close. > > > > > > ________________________________________ > > > From: bened...@apache.org <bened...@apache.org> > > > Sent: Monday, June 14, 2021 3:03 PM > > > To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > > > Subject: Re: Are we ready for 4.0.0 (GA) ? > > > > > > A rate of 4/30 is a rate of 13% true bugs, which worries me with > respect > > to our promise of shipping a bug-free GA. In past releases we have > ensured > > no flaky tests, I think. > > > > > > That said, I’ve not had the time to contribute to the fixing of flaky > > tests, so I’ll leave the decision to those who have, or otherwise have a > > strong opinion. > > > > > > > > > From: Ekaterina Dimitrova <e.dimitr...@gmail.com> > > > Date: Monday, 14 June 2021 at 20:51 > > > To: dev@cassandra.apache.org <dev@cassandra.apache.org> > > > Subject: Re: Are we ready for 4.0.0 (GA) ? > > > To give some context around the flaky tests, I pulled a quick report > for > > the fixed ones during the past two months. It is attached for your > > reference. > > > > > > To summarize, in two months 30 tickets for flaky tests were closed and > > only 4 of them were Cassandra bugs(marked in red in the report), the rest > > of them were test fixes. > > > > > > I think Butler and running in a loop any new tests before adding them > to > > our test suite will help a lot. Also, Mick did a lot of work to stabilize > > Jenkins. Timeouts and resource issues are less common than before, that > is > > a win! Thank you Mick! > > > > > > Best regards, > > > Ekaterina > > > > > > > > > On Mon, 14 Jun 2021 at 13:08, Adam Holmberg < > adam.holmb...@datastax.com > > <mailto:adam.holmb...@datastax.com>> wrote: > > > To the point of "long-term observability over flakies": > > > > > > I will mention here that we intend to deploy a tool called Butler that > we > > > have developed and used internally for a while. It compliments Jenkins > to > > > present different views of test results, allowing developers to better > > > ascertain those tests that are flaky vs failing vs new regressions. We > > > already have a server provisioned for public hosting. The application > > > requires a bit of work to generalize for this project. We've been > putting > > > it on while focused on getting 4.0 over the line, but should be getting > > to > > > it soon after. > > > > > >> On Mon, Jun 14, 2021 at 11:33 AM Mick Semb Wever <m...@apache.org > > <mailto:m...@apache.org>> wrote: > > >> > > >> Are we ready to cut 4.0.0 (GA) once the following tickets land? > > >> > > >> CASSANDRA-16733 – Allow operators to disable 'ALTER ... DROP COMPACT > > >> STORAGE' statements" > > >> CASSANDRA-16669 – Password obfuscation for DCL audit log statements > > >> CASSANDRA-16735 – Adding columns via ALTER TABLE can generate corrupt > > >> sstables > > >> > > >> > > >> A bit more background. > > >> > > >> 1. On our 4.0 GA board there's a few other tickets, which have > priority > > but > > >> are not blockers for a GA release. > > >> > > >> > > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/RapidBoard.jspa?rapidView=355&quickFilter=1661 > > >> > > >> CASSANDRA-16715 – WEBSITE - June 2021 updates > > >> CASSANDRA-12519 – dtest failure in > > >> offline_tools_test.TestOfflineTools.sstableofflinerelevel_test > > >> CASSANDRA-16681 – > org.apache.cassandra.utils.memory.LongBufferPoolTest - > > >> tests are flaky > > >> CASSANDRA-16689 – Flaky LeaveAndBootstrapTest > > >> > > >> > > >> 2. We also said we would get 5 green CI runs in a row. Progress on > that > > >> front > > >> has been slow and risks delaying GA and our user base. It has had > > priority > > >> and there's been lots of momentum which is persisting: lots of flaky > > fixes > > >> committed; and the following are being discussed to keep pushing it in > > the > > >> right direction… > > >> - Long-term observability over flakies > > >> - Jenkins agent observability (infra stability) > > >> > > >> The past weeks has seen good progress on stability of ci-cassandra.a.o > > with > > >> the introduction of cpu docker limits imposed, and better monitoring > of > > the > > >> agents so we can ensure we get the saturation and load we want. > > Dockerising > > >> the cqlshlib tests is also in progress. > > >> > > >> The alternative to a 4.0.0 GA release is a 4.0-rc2 release. > > >> Should the next release be: 4.0.0 (GA) or 4.0-rc2 ? > > >> > > > > > > > > > -- > > > Adam Holmberg > > > e. adam.holmb...@datastax.com<mailto:adam.holmb...@datastax.com> > > > w. www.datastax.com<http://www.datastax.com> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > > > > >
