On Tue, Jun 26, 2012 at 7:45 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> I've started commenting on the issues, but to take a higher level
> view, I'd say that it looks a lot more tractable than I thought at
> first, and props to you and Eric for pushing through with it.
>
> Besides the four (five including 3881)
On 27 June 2012 01:45, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> I've started commenting on the issues, but to take a higher level
> view, I'd say that it looks a lot more tractable than I thought at
> first, and props to you and Eric for pushing through with it.
Thanks!
> Besides the four (five including 3881) p
I've started commenting on the issues, but to take a higher level
view, I'd say that it looks a lot more tractable than I thought at
first, and props to you and Eric for pushing through with it.
Besides the four (five including 3881) posted so far, I think 4123
needs to be on the critical path for
On Sun, Jun 24, 2012 at 1:24 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> Is it fair to say that 3881 and 4121 are the key tickets, and the others
> are mostly dealing with fallout from that?
3881 just reduces the computational complexity of
calculateNaturalEndpoints, which becomes (more of a )problem with many
t
Is it fair to say that 3881 and 4121 are the key tickets, and the others
are mostly dealing with fallout from that?
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
> So to followup on this, my take on the first discussion
> (http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@cassandra.apache.org/msg03837.html)
>
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:40 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> I was waiting for a response to Brandon's performance smoke test (33%
> slower than trunk, as commented on
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4119) before digging
> deeper.
I hadn't noticed that to be honest; I'd been watchin
I was waiting for a response to Brandon's performance smoke test (33%
slower than trunk, as commented on
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4119) before digging
deeper.
On Wed, Jun 20, 2012 at 4:25 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
> So to followup on this, my take on the first discussion
> (htt
So to followup on this, my take on the first discussion
(http://www.mail-archive.com/dev@cassandra.apache.org/msg03837.html)
was that there was some concern about how invasive this change would
be. This was then followed by discussion about the trade-offs between
trying to push such a big change i
Hi Sam, Cassandra,
What interactions with Partitioning Strategies are there for this work? Will
the Random
Partitioner / Order Preserving Partitioner dichotomy remain largely unaffected
through this
change? Is there any potential unlocked or closed off by this move?
Pardon if this is totally of
On Fri, Jun 1, 2012 at 11:50 AM, Sam Overton wrote:
> Hello cassandra-dev,
>
> This is an update on the previous discussion on virtual nodes
Thanks for the update, Sam!
> The easiest way to test these changes is to clone our github repo and
> switch to the topic branch representing the top patch
10 matches
Mail list logo
