We all appreciate it, and erring on the side of caution. Thank you. On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 12:22 PM Martin Sumner <martin.sum...@adaptip.co.uk> wrote:
> Follow-up on this announcement. After further work today, it looks like > the initial diagnosis of the Issue 1707 was incorrect, and that the defect > does not obviously present a significant risk of data loss. Work will > continue on providing an updated patch to Riak 2.9.0 - but there should be > no immediate concern over use of the unpatched version. > > Sorry for causing false alarm. > > Regards > > Martin > > On Thu, 22 Aug 2019 at 01:36, Martin Sumner <martin.sum...@adaptip.co.uk> > wrote: > >> There are 2 defects in the 2.9.0 release which should be patched within >> the next 7 days, with a new version of 2.9.0 to be published before the end >> of the month. The defects are: >> >> https://github.com/basho/riak_kv/issues/1706 >> https://github.com/basho/riak_kv/issues/1707 >> >> Note that the latter defect 1707, the scope of this bug is currently >> unclear, but there exists significant risk that there is potential within >> this bug for data loss, due to incorrect pruning of siblings. >> >> Previous releases of Riak also have this bug, if the metadata cache >> (which is disabled by default) is enabled. Enabling this cache is >> controlled via >> https://docs.riak.com/riak/kv/latest/configuring/reference/index.html >> (metadata_cache_size). >> However, unlike previous releases the 2.9.0 release, when combined with use >> of the leveled backend, Riak 2.9.0 will enable the path to this bug by >> default. This is because the logic of the metadata_cache is reused in >> order to enable leveled HEAD requests within the PUT path. Riak 2.9.0 with >> other backends, and the metadata cache left disabled, will not have this >> bug. >> >> I apologise for the ongoing churn of issues uncovered in release 2.9.0, >> and for the potential risks associated with this latest bug in particular. >> Clearly, the high rate of discovered problems has exposed that the test >> process which surrounded this release was not good enough. For release >> 2.9.1 and release 3.0 the move has already been made to involve independent >> testing organisations as a fundamental part of the development process, >> from the start of the process. Regardless of this, once the immediate >> issues are patched, there is a need for some further reflection on what is >> required to assure the safety of a release of Riak in the future. >> >> Regards >> >> Martin >> > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > riak-users@lists.basho.com > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com >
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
