Re: Upgrade the jna version to 4.3.0

2017-03-05 Thread Amitkumar Ghatwal
Hi Jason, I have created a JIRA ticket : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13300 for this upgrade activity . Please do let me know when the jna version will be upgraded on github -https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/trunk/lib/ . Regards, Amit From: Jason Brown To: d

Re: Upgrade the jna version to 4.3.0

2017-03-05 Thread Michael Kjellman
Amit – What changes/bug fixes specifically are you looking for in JNA 4.3.0? Thanks! best, kjellman Sent from my iPhone > On Mar 5, 2017, at 12:58 PM, Jason Brown wrote: > > Hi Amit, > > Can you open a Jira for that? Also we can figure out which branches to > target for the upgrade on the Ji

Re: Upgrade the jna version to 4.3.0

2017-03-05 Thread Jason Brown
Hi Amit, Can you open a Jira for that? Also we can figure out which branches to target for the upgrade on the Jira. Thanks, Jason On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 08:25 Amitkumar Ghatwal wrote: > > > Hi All, > > Could you please upgrade the jna version present in the github cassandra > location : > http

Upgrade the jna version to 4.3.0

2017-03-05 Thread Amitkumar Ghatwal
Hi All, Could you please upgrade the jna version present in the github cassandra location : https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/trunk/lib/jna-4.0.0.jar to below latest version - 4.3.0 - http://repo1.maven.org/maven2/net/java/dev/jna/jna/4.3.0/jna-4.3.0-javadoc.jar . Let me know the proc

Re: State of triggers

2017-03-05 Thread benjamin roth
There is a German saying: Sometimes you don't see the woods because of the lots of trees. Am 05.03.2017 09:25 schrieb "DuyHai Doan" : > No problem, distributed systems are hard to reason about, I got caught many > times in the past > > On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 9:23 AM, benjamin roth wrote: > > >

Re: State of triggers

2017-03-05 Thread benjamin roth
Not maybe. You are absolutely right. Bad idea. Hmpf. Am 05.03.2017 09:23 schrieb "benjamin roth" : > Sorry. Answer was to fast. Maybe you are right. > > Am 05.03.2017 09:21 schrieb "benjamin roth" : > >> No. You just change the partitioner. That's all >> >> Am 05.03.2017 09:15 schrieb "DuyHai Doa

Re: State of triggers

2017-03-05 Thread DuyHai Doan
No problem, distributed systems are hard to reason about, I got caught many times in the past On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 9:23 AM, benjamin roth wrote: > Sorry. Answer was to fast. Maybe you are right. > > Am 05.03.2017 09:21 schrieb "benjamin roth" : > > > No. You just change the partitioner. That's

Re: State of triggers

2017-03-05 Thread benjamin roth
Sorry. Answer was to fast. Maybe you are right. Am 05.03.2017 09:21 schrieb "benjamin roth" : > No. You just change the partitioner. That's all > > Am 05.03.2017 09:15 schrieb "DuyHai Doan" : > >> "How can that be achieved? I haven't done "scientific researches" yet but >> I >> guess a "MV partit

Re: State of triggers

2017-03-05 Thread benjamin roth
No. You just change the partitioner. That's all Am 05.03.2017 09:15 schrieb "DuyHai Doan" : > "How can that be achieved? I haven't done "scientific researches" yet but I > guess a "MV partitioner" could do the trick. Instead of applying the > regular partitioner, an MV partitioner would calculate

Re: State of triggers

2017-03-05 Thread DuyHai Doan
"How can that be achieved? I haven't done "scientific researches" yet but I guess a "MV partitioner" could do the trick. Instead of applying the regular partitioner, an MV partitioner would calculate the PK of the base table (which is always possible) and then apply the regular partitioner." The m

Re: State of triggers

2017-03-05 Thread benjamin roth
While I was reading the MV paragraph in your post, an idea popped up: The problem with MV inconsistencies and inconsistent range movement is that the "MV contract" is broken. This only happens because base data and replica data reside on different hosts. If base data + replicas would stay on the s