Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-18 Thread Riccardo Ferrari
Check the "Compatibility" section of the Cassandra Java driver. Since the driver is backward compatible when we did upgraded we first upgrade our applications to the latest java driver version then we upgraded our C* cluster. best, On Mon, Jul 18, 2016 at 9:06 AM, Varun Barala wrote: > Thanks

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-18 Thread Varun Barala
Thanks everyone for your detailed explanation!! We are going to upgrade from 2.1 to 3.0.8 as many people agreed that It's safe skipping measure version 2.2. Could anyone please tell me which *cassandra java driver* will be compatible with 3.0.8 ? Currently we are using *2.1.7.1 driver version* So

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-14 Thread Romain Hardouin
DSE 4.8 uses C* 2.1 and DSE 5.0 uses C* 3.0. So I would say that 2.1->3.0 is more tested by DataStax than 2.2->3.0. Le Jeudi 14 juillet 2016 11h37, Stefano Ortolani a écrit : FWIW, I've recently upgraded from 2.1 to 3.0 without issues of any sort, but admittedly I haven't been using a

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-14 Thread Stefano Ortolani
FWIW, I've recently upgraded from 2.1 to 3.0 without issues of any sort, but admittedly I haven't been using anything too fancy. Cheers, Stefano On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 10:28 PM, Alain RODRIGUEZ wrote: > Hi Anuj > > From > https://docs.datastax.com/en/latest-upgrade/upgrade/cassandra/upgrdBestP

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-13 Thread Alain RODRIGUEZ
Hi Anuj From https://docs.datastax.com/en/latest-upgrade/upgrade/cassandra/upgrdBestPractCassandra.html : >- Employ a continual upgrade strategy for each year. Upgrades are >impacted by the version you are upgrading from and the version you are >upgrading to. The greater the gap betw

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-13 Thread Tyler Hobbs
On Wed, Jul 13, 2016 at 11:32 AM, Anuj Wadehra wrote: > Why do you think that skipping 2.2 is not recommended when NEWS.txt > suggests otherwise? Can you elaborate? We test upgrading from 2.1 -> 3.x and upgrading from 2.2 -> 3.x equivalently. There should not be a difference in terms of how we

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-13 Thread Anuj Wadehra
Hi Alain, This caught my attention: "Also I am not sure if the 2.2 major version is something you can skip while upgrading through a rolling restart. I believe you can, but it is not what is recommended." Why do you think that skipping 2.2 is not recommended when NEWS.txt suggests otherwise? Ca

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-12 Thread Johnny Miller
Hey Varun - yeah, I would stick to 3.0.x for stability reasons unless there is a feature in the later releases you want. You should be able to upgrade directly to 3.0 from 2.1 without going via 2.2 > On 12 Jul 2016, at 15:01, Alain RODRIGUEZ wrote: > > Hi, > > The only "fix" release after 3.5

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-12 Thread Riccardo Ferrari
You may want to read more about Cassandra release process, find: http://www.planetcassandra.org/blog/cassandra-2-2-3-0-and-beyond/ On Tue, Jul 12, 2016 at 4:01 PM, Alain RODRIGUEZ wrote: > Hi, > > The only "fix" release after 3.5 is 3.7. Yet hard to say if it is more > stable, we can hope so. >

Re: (C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-12 Thread Alain RODRIGUEZ
Hi, The only "fix" release after 3.5 is 3.7. Yet hard to say if it is more stable, we can hope so. For Tic-Toc releases (on 3.X) Odd numbers are fix releases. Even numbers are feature releases. Not sure why you want something above 3.5, but take care, those versions are really recent, and less

(C)* stable version after 3.5

2016-07-12 Thread Varun Barala
Hi all users, Currently we are using cassandra-2.1.13 but we want to upgrade *2.1.13 to 3.x* in production. Could anyone please tell me which is the most stable *cassandra version after 3.5*. Thanking You!! Regards, Varun Barala