With 3.0, what happens to existing Thrift-based tables (with dynamic column 
names, etc.)?

Sean Durity

From: Jonathan Ellis [mailto:jbel...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 10, 2015 10:30 AM
To: user
Subject: Cassandra 2.2, 3.0, and beyond


As you know, we've split our post-2.1 release into two pieces, with 2.2 to be 
released in July (rc1 out Monday<http://cassandra.apache.org/download/>) and 
3.0 in September.


2.2 will include Windows support, commitlog 
compression<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6809>, JSON 
support<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7970>, role-based 
authorization<http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/role-based-access-control-in-cassandra>,
 bootstrap-aware leveled 
compaction<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7460>, and 
user-defined 
functions<http://christopher-batey.blogspot.com/2015/05/cassandra-aggregates-min-max-avg-group.html>.


3.0 will include a major storage engine 
rewrite<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8099> and materialized 
views<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6477>.


We're splitting things up this way because we don't want to block the features 
that are already complete while waiting for 8099 (the new storage engine).  
Releasing them now as 2.2 reduces the risk for users (2.2 has a lot in common 
with 2.1) and allows us to stabilize that independently of the upheaval from 
8099.


After 3.0, we'll take this even further: we will release 3.x versions monthly.  
Even releases will include both bugfixes and new features; odd releases will be 
bugfix-only.  You may have heard this referred to as "tick-tock" releases, 
after Intel's policy of changing process and architecture 
independently<http://www.intel.com/content/www/us/en/silicon-innovations/intel-tick-tock-model-general.html>.


The primary goal is to improve release quality.  Our current major "dot zero" 
releases require another five or six months to make them stable enough for 
production.  This is directly related to how we pile features in for 9 to 12 
months and release all at once.  The interactions between the new features are 
complex and not always obvious.  2.1 was no exception, despite DataStax hiring 
a full time test engineering team specifically for Apache Cassandra.


We need to try something different.  Tick-tock releases will dramatically 
reduce the number of features in each version, which will necessarily improve 
our ability to quickly track down any regressions.  And "pausing" every other 
month to focus on bug fixes will help ensure that we don't accumulate issues 
faster than we can fix them.


Tick-tock will also prevent situations like the one we are in now with 8099 
delaying everything else.  Users will get to test new features almost 
immediately.


To get there, we are investing significant effort in making trunk "always 
releasable," with the goal that each release, or at least each odd-numbered 
bugfix release, should be usable in production.  We’ve extended our continuous 
integration server to make it easy for contributors to run tests against 
feature 
branches<http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/cassandra-testing-improvements-for-developer-convenience-and-confidence>
 before merging to trunk and we’re working on more test 
infrastructure<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1Seku0vPwChbnH3uYYxon0UO-b6LDtSqluZiH--sWWi0>
 and 
procedures<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1ptr47UQ56N80jqL_O6AlE67b0STyn_cVp2k5DTv-OMc>
 to improve release quality.  You can see how this is coming along in our May 
retrospective<https://docs.google.com/document/d/1GtuYRocdr9luNdwmm8wE84uC5Wr6TvewFbQtqoAFVeU/edit>.


We are also extending our backwards compatibility policy to cover all 3.x 
releases: you will be able to upgrade seamlessly from 3.1 to 3.7, for instance, 
including cross-version repair.  We will not introduce any extra upgrade 
requirements or remove deprecated features until 4.0, no sooner than a year 
after 3.0.


Under normal conditions, we will not release 3.x.y stability releases for x > 
0.  That is, we will have a traditional 3.0.y stability series, but the 
odd-numbered bugfix-only releases will fill that role for the tick-tock series 
-- recognizing that occasionally we will need to be flexible enough to release 
an emergency fix in the case of a critical bug or security vulnerability.


We do recognize that it will take some time for tick-tock releases to deliver 
production-level stability, which is why we will continue to deliver 2.2.y and 
3.0.y bugfix releases.  (But if we do demonstrate that tick-tock can deliver 
the stability we want, there will be no need for a 4.0.y bugfix series, only 
4.x tick-tock.)

After 2.2.0 is released, 2.0 will reach end-of-life as planned.  After 3.0.0 is 
released, 2.1 will also reach end of life.  This is earlier than expected, but 
2.2 will be very close to as stable as 2.1 and users will be well served by 
upgrading.  We will maintain the 2.2 stability series until 4.0 is released, 
and 3.0 for six months after that.



Thanks for reading this far, and I look forward to hearing how 2.2rc1 works for 
you!

--
Jonathan Ellis
Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
@spyced


________________________________

The information in this Internet Email is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this Email by 
anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in 
reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our 
clients any opinions or advice contained in this Email are subject to the terms 
and conditions expressed in any applicable governing The Home Depot terms of 
business or client engagement letter. The Home Depot disclaims all 
responsibility and liability for the accuracy and content of this attachment 
and for any damages or losses arising from any inaccuracies, errors, viruses, 
e.g., worms, trojan horses, etc., or other items of a destructive nature, which 
may be contained in this attachment and shall not be liable for direct, 
indirect, consequential or special damages in connection with this e-mail 
message or its attachment.

Reply via email to