1.0.9 -> 1.0.12 -> 1.1.12 -> 1.2.x?

Because this fix in 1.0.11:
* fix 1.0.x node join to mixed version cluster, other nodes >= 1.1 (CASSANDRA-4195)

-Jeremiah

On Aug 30, 2013, at 2:00 PM, Mike Neir <mike@liquidweb.com> wrote:

Is there anything that you can link that describes the pitfalls you mention? I'd like a bit more information. Just for clarity's sake, are you recommending 1.0.9 -> 1.0.12 -> 1.1.12 -> 1.2.x? Or would  1.0.9 -> 1.1.12 -> 1.2.x suffice?

Regarding the placement strategy mentioned in a different post, I'm using the Simple placement strategy, with the RackInferringSnitch. How does that play into the bugs mentioned previously about cross-DC replication?

MN

On 08/30/2013 01:28 PM, Jeremiah D Jordan wrote:
You probably want to go to 1.0.11/12 first no matter what.  If you want the least chance of issue you should then go to 1.1.12.  While there is a high probability that going from 1.0.X->1.2 will work. You have the best chance at no failures if you go through 1.1.12.  There are some edge cases that can cause errors if you don't do that.

-Jeremiah