So where does this leave us with this release? Get Alex's patch committed and reroll, reroll with a NEWS entry, or... ?
Kind Regards, Brandon On Thu, Aug 1, 2024 at 9:04 AM Tommy Stendahl via dev <dev@cassandra.apache.org> wrote: > > Hi, > > First, thanks everyone for considering this. I did not expect such a big > discussion form this, for me it was not such a big thing and a think > CASSANDRA-19534 is a very good improvement. > > If I have to recompile I would also update the code so I'm not sure I see > much benefit with compile time compatibility. What made me react and raise > the issue was the complete surprise that this would fail when I upgraded my > test cluster to 4.1.6. My expectation was that a change like this would have > been discussed or at least mentioned on the ML or Slack but I can't remember > seeing anything. A note in the NEWS-file would also have made aware, I > wouldn't have been super happy but I would have know what to expect and what > I had to do. > > ecaudit is one thing we do that use the QueryHandler interface but for our > internal we also use have a few implementations for query tracing/logging and > prioritize requests. I would say that the QueryHandler interface together > with the custom payload feature in the native protocol is a powerful > combination and I would not be surprised if this is used more then you might > expect. > > -----Original Message----- > From: J. D. Jordan <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> > Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > Subject: Re: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.1.6 > Date: Thu, 01 Aug 2024 08:26:42 -0500 > > @Tommy do you think? You brought the issue up, I am assuming because you > found the issue while trying to test ecaudit against the proposed release and > it broke the integration? > As an active consumer of the interface what are your thoughts? > > On Aug 1, 2024, at 8:17 AM, Alex Petrov <al...@coffeenco.de> wrote: > > > > If we have a path that resolves the issue and also maintains full > > compatibility for this (semi- / reluctantly-accessible) interface, that > > would seem ideal. Interested to learn more about the drawbacks to that > > approach. > > My thinking here was that people who might have a binary dependency on this > interface have to recompile their code, they may as well change 2 lines by > adding a call to from the new method with `requestTime.startedAtNanos()`. I > am not in a strong opposition to merging it though. If there is general > agreement that this is the best way, let's do this: I do not see any > drawbacks in terms of performance or otherwise. > > If we decide to move forward with, it, the patch is up [1]. > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-19811 > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024, at 11:24 PM, C. Scott Andreas wrote: > > Sorry to veer off from a vote in a vote thread. > > @Alex, can you say more about this statement: > > > "I think I would prefer to not introduce the change I have proposed (the > > one that would bring back non-binary compatibility)." > > If we have a path that resolves the issue and also maintains full > compatibility for this (semi- / reluctantly-accessible) interface, that would > seem ideal. Interested to learn more about the drawbacks to that approach. > > Regarding the value of C-19534 I'm happy to attest to the fact that it > addresses severe metastable failure modes in clusters under heavy traffic on > the verge of tipping. Jon Haddad's independent testing validated this as > discussed on the ticket as well: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-19534 > > Last, @Tommy this is a great catch and I'm glad you raised it. Thanks for > watching so closely and appreciate you bringing it to everyone's attention. > > – Scott > > On Jul 31, 2024, at 1:05 PM, Caleb Rackliffe <calebrackli...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 to proceeding with a simple upgrade note in NEWS > > On Wed, Jul 31, 2024 at 12:50 PM Josh McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> wrote: > > > Unfortunately, I can not immediately see a good way to provide the critical > bugfix of CASSANDRA-19534, affecting all Cassandra users, without making at > least some change in this API. > > I personally think that this method is very tightly coupled to the > implementation to expose it via -D. If anyone using it could provide some > context about why it is an important part of API, it would be give some > useful context. > > Nobody stepping up to engage on the technical piece of this? Unless / until > somebody does, Alex' argument holds the most weight as the expert with what's > going on IMO. > > The question we're facing is - when we find a defect that requires a change > in a public facing API, which of the following 2 is more important: > > Keeping the API stable > Having the defect resolved > > Obviously this will be case-by-case. What CASSANDRA-19534 addresses: > > When a node is under pressure, hundreds of thousands of requests can show up > in the native transport queue, and it looks like it can take way longer to > timeout than is configured. > ... > After stopping the load test altogether, it took nearly a minute before the > requests were no longer queued. > > I believe our priority here should be having this defect resolved. > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024, at 1:43 PM, Jordan West wrote: > > I would make the case that loss of availability / significant performance > issue, regardless of the amount of time it has existed for, is worth fixing > on the branches that are widely deployed by the community. Especially when > weighed against a loosely defined public interface issue. > > The queuing issue has been a persistent problem (like you said 10 years) and > I regularly (approx once every 1-2 weeks) have to tell my customers “we > either have to wait for Cassandra to clear the queues or do a rolling restart > to fix it” both which come at a cost during an incident where a client > overloaded the DB and the impact is severe or business impacting. Especially > for customers doing LWTs or using non-standard RFs which are also more > prevalent in my experience than an external implementation of QueryHandler. > > While not data loss, I would argue this is a critical bug and if we did find > a data loss issue dormant for 10 years (which has happened in the past) we > would fix it as soon as it was found and a patch was made available on all > actively maintained versions. > > Jordan > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 10:30 Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > It’s a 10 year old flaw in an 18 month old branch. Why does it need to go > into 4.1, it’s not a regression and it clearly breaks compatibility? > > > > > On Jul 30, 2024, at 8:52 AM, Jon Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com> wrote: > > This patch fixes a long standing issue that's the root cause of availability > failures. Even though folks can specify a custom query handler with the -D > flag, the number of users impacted by this is going to be incredibly small. > On the other hand, the fix helps every single user of 4.1 that puts too much > pressure on the cluster, which happens fairly regularly. > > My POV is that it's a fairly weak argument that this is a public interface, > but I don't consider it worth debating whether it is or not, because even if > it is, this improves stability of the database for all users, so it's worth > going in. Let's not be dogmatic about fixes that help 99% of users because > an incredibly small number that actually implement a custom query handler > will need to make a trivial update in order to use the latest 4.1.6 > dependency. > > Jon > > > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 8:09 AM J. D. Jordan <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > Given we allow a pluggable query handler implementation to be specified for > the server with a -D during startup. So I would consider the query handler > one of our public interfaces. > > On Jul 30, 2024, at 9:35 AM, Alex Petrov <al...@coffeenco.de> wrote: > > > Hi Tommy, > > Thank you for spotting this and bringing this to community's attention. > > I believe our primary interfaces are native and internode protocol, and CLI > tools. Most interfaces are used to to abstract implementations internally. > Few interfaces, such as DataType, Partitioner, and Triggers can be depended > upon by external tools using Cassandra as a library. There is no official way > to plug in a QueryHandler, so I did not consider it to be a part of our > public API. > > From [1]: > > > These considerations are especially important for public APIs, including > > CQL, virtual tables, JMX, yaml, system properties, etc. Any planned > > additions must be carefully considered in the context of any existing APIs. > > Where possible the approach of any existing API should be followed. > > Maybe we should have an exhaustive list of public APIs, and explicitly > mention that native and internode protocols are included, alongside with > nodetool command API and output, but also which classes/interfaces > specifically should be evolved with care. > > Thank you, > --Alex > > [1] https://cassandra.apache.org/_/development/index.html > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024, at 10:56 AM, Tommy Stendahl via dev wrote: > > Hi, > > There is a change in the QueryHandler interface introduced by > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-19534 > > Do we allow changes such changes between 4.1.5 and 4.1.6? > CASSANDRA-19534 looks like a very good change so maybe there is an exception > in this case? > > /Tommy > > -----Original Message----- > From: Brandon Williams <brandonwilli...@apache.org> > Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org > To: dev <dev@cassandra.apache.org> > Subject: [VOTE] Release Apache Cassandra 4.1.6 > Date: Mon, 29 Jul 2024 09:36:04 -0500 > > Proposing the test build of Cassandra 4.1.6 for release. > > > > sha1: b662744af59f3a3dfbfeb7314e29fecb93abfd80 > > > Git: > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fcassandra%2Ftree%2F4.1.6-tentative&data=05%7C02%7Ctommy.stendahl%40ericsson.com%7C30a819344e48491e561908dcafdbddf4%7C92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C638578606055937277%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=BWaJmvRTXvrMh%2FFBRzt%2FOost%2Bn6xAkgePP2ObtmTnbY%3D&reserved=0 > > > > Maven Artifacts: > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Frepository.apache.org%2Fcontent%2Frepositories%2Forgapachecassandra-1339%2Forg%2Fapache%2Fcassandra%2Fcassandra-all%2F4.1.6%2F&data=05%7C02%7Ctommy.stendahl%40ericsson.com%7C30a819344e48491e561908dcafdbddf4%7C92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C638578606055947610%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=2baa1fUTwQqDpPtFAdv%2FFU6sqax3LSkKEm%2FUdbcHsbE%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > The Source and Build Artifacts, and the Debian and RPM packages and > > > repositories, are available here: > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fdist.apache.org%2Frepos%2Fdist%2Fdev%2Fcassandra%2F4.1.6%2F&data=05%7C02%7Ctommy.stendahl%40ericsson.com%7C30a819344e48491e561908dcafdbddf4%7C92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C638578606055951106%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=9FUMT0F7c%2B0y7NbvgN9fQrSNgNO2YGfKMwk9ajy2MKA%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > The vote will be open for 72 hours (longer if needed). Everyone who > > > has tested the build is invited to vote. Votes by PMC members are > > > considered binding. A vote passes if there are at least three binding > > > +1s and no -1's. > > > > [1]: CHANGES.txt: > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fcassandra%2Fblob%2F4.1.6-tentative%2FCHANGES.txt&data=05%7C02%7Ctommy.stendahl%40ericsson.com%7C30a819344e48491e561908dcafdbddf4%7C92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C638578606055954173%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=3u1LazTB3GixsR7MEwxT%2ByqMrnwHjBL72r8Vy0C1HhE%3D&reserved=0 > > > > [2]: NEWS.txt: > > > https://eur02.safelinks.protection.outlook.com/?url=https%3A%2F%2Fgithub.com%2Fapache%2Fcassandra%2Fblob%2F4.1.6-tentative%2FNEWS.txt&data=05%7C02%7Ctommy.stendahl%40ericsson.com%7C30a819344e48491e561908dcafdbddf4%7C92e84cebfbfd47abbe52080c6b87953f%7C0%7C0%7C638578606055957376%7CUnknown%7CTWFpbGZsb3d8eyJWIjoiMC4wLjAwMDAiLCJQIjoiV2luMzIiLCJBTiI6Ik1haWwiLCJXVCI6Mn0%3D%7C0%7C%7C%7C&sdata=4TROx5HB5vJuLTYNoAqMx2A3%2FUUtZ3Edr6aa4JVvHEA%3D&reserved=0 > > > > > > Kind Regards, > > > Brandon > > > > > >
