Just a quick update... With CASSANDRA-18670 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18670> complete, and all remaining items in the category of performance optimizations and further testing, the process of merging to trunk will likely start today, beginning with a final rebase on the current trunk and J11 and J17 test runs.
On Tue, Jul 18, 2023 at 3:47 PM Caleb Rackliffe <calebrackli...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hello there! > > After much toil, the first phase of CEP-7 is nearing completion (see > CASSANDRA-16052 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16052>). > There are presently two issues to resolve before we'd like to merge the > cep-7-sai feature branch and all its goodness to trunk: > > CASSANDRA-18670 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18670> - > Importer should build SSTable indexes successfully before making new > SSTables readable (in review) > > CASSANDRA-18673 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18673> - > Reduce size of per-SSTable index components (in progress) > > (We've been getting clean CircleCI runs for a while now, and have been > using the multiplexer to sniff out as much flakiness as possible up front.) > > Once merged to trunk, the next steps are: > > 1.) Finish a Harry model that we can use to further fuzz test SAI before > 5.0 releases (see CASSANDRA-18275 > <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18275>). We've done a > fair amount of fuzz/randomized testing at the component level, but I'd > still consider Harry (at least around single-partition query use-cases) a > critical item for us to have confidence before release. > > 2.) Start pursuing Phase 2 items as time and our needs allow. (see > CASSANDRA-18473 <https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18473>) > > A reminder, SAI is a secondary index, and therefore is by definition an > opt-in feature, and has no explicit "feature flag". However, its > availability to users is still subject to the secondary_indexes_enabled > guardrail, which currently defaults to allowing creation. > > Any thoughts, questions, or comments on the pre-merge plan here? >
