On 12/09/2016 12:51, Benedict Elliott Smith wrote: Please tone down your language. There is no need for profanity.
Now is probably a good time to remind everyone of the Apache Code of Conduct: http://www.apache.org/foundation/policies/conduct.html > (a link to 3rd party docs in response to a question when an > equivalent link to project hosted docs was available) > > > No, it wasn't. Or at least the link you sent was not remotely the same > as the link in the email you responded to, which was about how to > understand your partition sizes - not the configuration parameter. > Possibly you responded to the wrong email. I did respond to the wrong e-mail. I apologise for any confusion caused. I intended to respond to this message: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/6a68da3467b1fe8fe96c1bede135d329419b78bf3cc3912e727304db@%3Cuser.cassandra.apache.org%3E rather than this one: https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/39a47ddf3cdecf6a196967ba679c30d65279a2afc05a2588e8c69bac@%3Cuser.cassandra.apache.org%3E I must have clicked on the wrong message in the thread as I moved between windows. > Any member of a project community (contributor, committer or PMC > member) > > > Right. But policing /users/ (which Mark most certainly is) is just > douchebaggery. Users should feel free to participate with the resources > /they know best /without fear of reprisal. All of your statement > suggests this shit belongs on the dev list. Users are as much part of the community as anyone else. > Or are we really suggesting that anyone discussing things on the user > list must be 100% conversant with the "official" docs before they can > make any kind of posting to the list? Or otherwise they can expect to > be attacked by other community members? I am not saying that at all. I am saying that, unless there is a good reason, links to documentation - particularly reference documentation - should be to the official Apache hosts docs in preference to links to a third party. > Talk about chilling. I do not see this promoting engagement - who wants > to help other users out if this is what they can expect in return? A > public shaming? My response was not to Mark, but to the community as a whole. It was not intended as either a reprimand or a shaming. If Mark feels differently, then I apologise. My intention was to make a simple request to the community as a whole to reference the official documentation in preference to 3rd party docs unless there was a good reason. > Linking to third party docs, blogs, etc is fairly common but they > tend to be linked by the OP in the form of "I've followed the > instructions I found here and it doesn't work". > > > Bullshit. Try a simple google > search: site:https://mail-archives.apache.org/mod_mbox/cassandra-user/ > thelastpickle.com/blog <http://thelastpickle.com/blog> > > There are 500 results. For just one external resource. I don't recall > a single one of these resulting in a reprimand. Try the first three > links from the search - they do not fit /any/ of your characterisations > of "normal" - but they do fit mine. None of which, according to Google, have been made since I joined the list in August. The past is the past and I don't see how a review of any of those posts helps the project. There are also ~1500 references to docs.datastax.com. I don't think reviewing those posts would help either. I'll note that the search didn't turn up this post (probably because of the combined delay in mail-archives.a.o updating and Google indexing the site): https://lists.apache.org/thread.html/7f60b641c40e5e7ba9c7c5c90eee47a94e5ce8690450c7617adc4a41@%3Cuser.cassandra.apache.org%3E That is a good example of the "more involved" question I referred to previously. Hopefully, some of that information will find its way into the architecture section of the official docs. > Perhaps you can link the history of projects attacking users for their > email content? I did say that linking to 3rd party reference docs rather than the official reference docs as part of an answer to a question was unusual. In the Apache community I know best, Tomcat, I do recall it happening a few times but less than once a year. I don't recall any of the specifics so finding a reference in the ~150k user@ list messages over the last 10 years is a tall order. I did try, but finding a reference is going to take more time than I have. Mark > On 12 September 2016 at 12:10, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org > <mailto:ma...@apache.org>> wrote: > > On 09/09/2016 21:11, Benedict Elliott Smith wrote: > > Come on. This kind of inconsistent 'policing' is not helpful. > > How is it inconsistent? Since I subscribed to the mailing list on 22 > August, this is the first instance I have seen of anyone providing a > link to third party docs rather than the equivalent project hosted docs > in response to a user question. If I missed any, please point them out. > The lists are pretty busy and that, combined with my minimal technical > knowledge of Cassandra, means it is perfectly possible I missed some. > > I've done a quick double check of the user@ archives and while I do see > a number of messages referencing 3rd party docs, those references were > made by the OP rather than someone from the community providing an > answer. > > > By all means, push the /*committers*/ to improve the project docs > as is > > happening, and to promote the internal resources over external ones. > > > > But Mark has absolutely no formal connection with the project, and his > > contributions have only been to file a couple of JIRA (all of which have > > so far been ignored by those of his colleagues who /are/ active > > community members, I'll note!). Shaming him for not linking docs that > > describe something /other/ than what he was even talking about is > > crossing the line IMO. > > Any member of a project community (contributor, committer or PMC member) > directing users to 3rd party docs in preference to project docs without > a good reason is missing an opportunity to strengthen that project > community. > > > Linking to third-party resources is commonplace, the only difference I > > can see here is that these have been called "docs" by the authors, > > instead of a blog post, and Mark has a DataStax email address. > > Linking to third party reference docs for an Apache project in response > to a configuration question about that Apache project on one of the > project's mailing lists is pretty unusual. > > Linking to third party docs, blogs, etc is fairly common but they tend > to be linked by the OP in the form of "I've followed the instructions I > found here and it doesn't work". The responses to such questions > typically include links to the relevant parts of the Apache hosted docs. > > If the question is more involved then I have seen links to blogs, > presentations, YouTube etc provided as an answer. If this happens > multiple times for the same topic then it is usually added to an FAQ, > wiki or similar along with an e-mail to the author to see if they'd be > willing to contribute something to the docs. > > > Would you have reacted this way if Aaron Morton linked a blog post by > > thelastpickle? Or a random user posted their own resources? Obviously > not. > > Wrong. My reaction was based on the content of the message (a link to > 3rd party docs in response to a question when an equivalent link to > project hosted docs was available) not on who sent it or their employer. > > > I was initially all for the ASF endeavour to counteract DataStax' > > outsized influence on the project, and was hopeful you might achieve > > some positive change. Perhaps you may well still do. But it seems to > > me that the ASF behaviour is beginning to cross from constructive > > criticism of the project participants to prejudicially hostile behaviour > > against certain community members - and that is unlikely to result in a > > better project. > > > > You should be treating everyone consistently, in a manner that promotes > > project health. > > It is not healthy if community members are directing users to 3rd party > documentation in preference to the project's own documentation. If it is > happening because the project's documentation is non-existent / wrong / > poorly written / etc. then that is understandable (and would be an issue > the project needed to address) but that was not the case in this > instance. > > There are many aspects to community health. In the grand scheme of > things the single e-mail that started this particular discussion is in > the noise. However, a consistent pattern of such e-mails would be much > more troubling. My intent was to ensure that such a pattern did not > form. > > Whether people agree with my response or not, the community is hopefully > more aware of the issue than it was previously. > > Mark > > > > On Friday, 9 September 2016, Mark Thomas <ma...@apache.org > <mailto:ma...@apache.org> > > <mailto:ma...@apache.org <mailto:ma...@apache.org>>> wrote: > > > > On 09/09/2016 16:46, Mark Curtis wrote: > > > If your partition sizes are over 100MB iirc then you'll > normally see > > > warnings in your system.log, this will outline the partition > key, at > > > least in Cassandra 2.0 and 2.1 as I recall. > > > > > > Your best friend here is nodetool cfstats which shows you the > > > min/mean/max partition sizes for your table. It's quite > often used to > > > pinpoint large partitons on nodes in a cluster. > > > > > > More info > > > here: > > > > https://docs.datastax.com/en/cassandra/2.1/cassandra/tools/toolsCFstats.html > > <https://docs.datastax.com/en/cassandra/2.1/cassandra/tools/toolsCFstats.html> > > > > <https://docs.datastax.com/en/cassandra/2.1/cassandra/tools/toolsCFstats.html > > <https://docs.datastax.com/en/cassandra/2.1/cassandra/tools/toolsCFstats.html>> > > > > Folks, > > > > It is *Apache* Cassandra. If you are going to point to docs, > please > > point to the official Apache docs unless there is a very good > reason > > not to. > > > > In this case: > > > > > > http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassandra_config_file.html#compaction_large_partition_warning_threshold_mb > > <http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassandra_config_file.html#compaction_large_partition_warning_threshold_mb> > > > > <http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassandra_config_file.html#compaction_large_partition_warning_threshold_mb > > <http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/configuration/cassandra_config_file.html#compaction_large_partition_warning_threshold_mb>> > > > > looks to the place. > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > > > Mark > > > > > > > > > On 9 September 2016 at 02:53, Anshu Vajpayee > <anshu.vajpa...@gmail.com <mailto:anshu.vajpa...@gmail.com> > > > <mailto:anshu.vajpa...@gmail.com > <mailto:anshu.vajpa...@gmail.com>>> wrote: > > > > > > Is there any way to get partition size for a partition > key ? > > > > > > > > > >
