Mailing-List: contact dev-help@activemq.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@activemq.apache.org
In-Reply-To: <CAGeh-pEk+X6j2pZL_qrdJ8UGyWZWNrh99GO1-cvtoZwVs7oOcg@mail.gmail.com>
References: <CACHnxzyPrJAUKc9HDrby-oEeZ814p=EcAuKspF6O+RNAbOb=cQ@mail.gmail.com> <612629230.14759987.1479219382685.JavaMail.zimbra@redhat.com> <CAKF+bsoEWSTersU3QhA=Ve=6s0MNPNch_YfKodje+zezyE+K3Q@mail.gmail.com> <81E03DC1-966F-49F9-9994-F73EB4EEA499@bennet-schulz.de> <CAGeh-pEk+X6j2pZL_qrdJ8UGyWZWNrh99GO1-cvtoZwVs7oOcg@mail.gmail.com>
Thread-Topic: Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB deprecation
User-Agent: Type for Android
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----HQ0W83OEJPFPQN5O85UIG0P98Q9NMW"
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Subject: Re: [DISCUSS] LevelDB deprecation
From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Jean-Baptiste_Onofr=E9?= <jb@nanthrax.net>
Date: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 12:17:46 +0100
To: dev@activemq.apache.org
CC: dev@activemq.apache.org
Message-ID: <37d1f875-04e4-4627-9e92-f464db8bc5da@typeapp.com>
archived-at: Wed, 16 Nov 2016 11:18:05 -0000

------HQ0W83OEJPFPQN5O85UIG0P98Q9NMW
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 8bit
Content-Type: text/plain;
 charset=UTF-8

+1

Regards
JB

⁣​

On Nov 16, 2016, 12:15, at 12:15, Dejan Bosanac <dejan@nighttale.net> wrote:
>+1
>
>Regards
>--
>Dejan Bosanac
>http://sensatic.net/about
>
>On Wed, Nov 16, 2016 at 8:11 AM, Bennet Schulz <mail@bennet-schulz.de>
>wrote:
>
>> +1
>>
>> > Am 15.11.2016 um 15:16 schrieb Clebert Suconic <
>> clebert.suconic@gmail.com>:
>> >
>> > +1
>> >
>> > On Tue, Nov 15, 2016 at 9:16 AM, Justin Bertram
><jbertram@apache.com>
>> wrote:
>> >> +1
>> >>
>> >> ----- Original Message -----
>> >> From: "Christopher Shannon" <christopher.l.shannon@gmail.com>
>> >> To: dev@activemq.apache.org
>> >> Sent: Tuesday, November 15, 2016 5:45:41 AM
>> >> Subject: [DISCUSS] LevelDB deprecation
>> >>
>> >> Hi Everyone,
>> >>
>> >> I just wanted to ask what people think about officially
>deprecating
>> LevelDB
>> >> in our 5.x broker and update our documentation to say that it is
>no
>> longer
>> >> recommended.  We can leave it in the code base for people who are
>still
>> >> using it but discourage its use.
>> >>
>> >> The main reason is that KahaDB continues to be the main focus
>where bugs
>> >> are fixed and not much attention is paid to LevelDB. There seems
>to be
>> >> several issues with corruption (especially with replication) so I
>don't
>> >> think it should be a recommended store unless the stability is
>sorted
>> out.
>> >> Unfortunately nearly every Jira reported against LevelDB goes
>ignored.
>> >>
>> >> Now that Artemis exists and supports replication I think the focus
>> should
>> >> be primarily on making Artemis the focus for users who need a
>replicated
>> >> store or to encourage the use of something like a shared file
>system
>> >> master/slave setup.
>> >
>> >
>> >
>> > --
>> > Clebert Suconic
>>
>>

------HQ0W83OEJPFPQN5O85UIG0P98Q9NMW--