Hi all,
 We have just come to realize that there is an issue that causes data
loss/inconsistent data. This affects  upgrades from 3.3.* to 3.4.0.
The issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1319. We
are working on a fix and will be doing a 3.4.1 ASAP. We will be
pulling back 3.4.0 so that folks do not download and start using it.
Other downstream projects will have to upgrade to 3.4.1. Sorry for
inconvenience.

thanks
mahadev

I believe this can effect not just 3.3->3.4 upgrades but also normal
operation of a 3.4 cluster. I'd suggest holding off on 3.4 until 3.4.1
is available. (Mahadev and I are working on it for RC later this week,
a patch should be available soon).

Patrick

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Mahadev Konar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Hi all,
>  We have just come to realize that there is an issue that causes data
> loss/inconsistent data. This affects  upgrades from 3.3.* to 3.4.0.
> The issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1319. We
> are working on a fix and will be doing a 3.4.1 ASAP. We will be
> pulling back 3.4.0 so that folks do not download and start using it.
> Other downstream projects will have to upgrade to 3.4.1. Sorry for
> inconvenience.
>
> thanks
> mahadev

Would you recommend avoiding 3.4.0 on the client-side even if the server
side is 3.3.*?

.. Adam

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> I believe this can effect not just 3.3->3.4 upgrades but also normal
> operation of a 3.4 cluster. I'd suggest holding off on 3.4 until 3.4.1
> is available. (Mahadev and I are working on it for RC later this week,
> a patch should be available soon).
>
> Patrick
>
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Mahadev Konar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> >  We have just come to realize that there is an issue that causes data
> > loss/inconsistent data. This affects  upgrades from 3.3.* to 3.4.0.
> > The issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1319. We
> > are working on a fix and will be doing a 3.4.1 ASAP. We will be
> > pulling back 3.4.0 so that folks do not download and start using it.
> > Other downstream projects will have to upgrade to 3.4.1. Sorry for
> > inconvenience.
> >
> > thanks
> > mahadev
>

Client side use should be much less problematic.

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Adam Rosien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:

> Would you recommend avoiding 3.4.0 on the client-side even if the server
> side is 3.3.*?
>
> .. Adam
>
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
> > I believe this can effect not just 3.3->3.4 upgrades but also normal
> > operation of a 3.4 cluster. I'd suggest holding off on 3.4 until 3.4.1
> > is available. (Mahadev and I are working on it for RC later this week,
> > a patch should be available soon).
> >
> > Patrick
> >
> > On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Mahadev Konar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
> > wrote:
> > > Hi all,
> > >  We have just come to realize that there is an issue that causes data
> > > loss/inconsistent data. This affects  upgrades from 3.3.* to 3.4.0.
> > > The issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1319. We
> > > are working on a fix and will be doing a 3.4.1 ASAP. We will be
> > > pulling back 3.4.0 so that folks do not download and start using it.
> > > Other downstream projects will have to upgrade to 3.4.1. Sorry for
> > > inconvenience.
> > >
> > > thanks
> > > mahadev
> >
>

Adam,
 As Ted mentioned, 3.4 client should be fine with 3.3 server. But
again, Ill be removing the 3.4.0 release from download and maven
repo's so it might impact you if you depend on the artifacts.

mahadev

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Adam Rosien <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Would you recommend avoiding 3.4.0 on the client-side even if the server
> side is 3.3.*?
>
> .. Adam
>
> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:32 AM, Patrick Hunt <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>
>> I believe this can effect not just 3.3->3.4 upgrades but also normal
>> operation of a 3.4 cluster. I'd suggest holding off on 3.4 until 3.4.1
>> is available. (Mahadev and I are working on it for RC later this week,
>> a patch should be available soon).
>>
>> Patrick
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 10:25 AM, Mahadev Konar <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
>> wrote:
>> > Hi all,
>> >  We have just come to realize that there is an issue that causes data
>> > loss/inconsistent data. This affects  upgrades from 3.3.* to 3.4.0.
>> > The issue is https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/ZOOKEEPER-1319. We
>> > are working on a fix and will be doing a 3.4.1 ASAP. We will be
>> > pulling back 3.4.0 so that folks do not download and start using it.
>> > Other downstream projects will have to upgrade to 3.4.1. Sorry for
>> > inconvenience.
>> >
>> > thanks
>> > mahadev
>>

>  As Ted mentioned, 3.4 client should be fine with 3.3 server. But
> again, Ill be removing the 3.4.0 release from download and maven
> repo's so it might impact you if you depend on the artifacts.
Since the client should be fine, what is the advantage of removing
from maven? Does anyone actually run a server from what is in maven?
Hbase maybe?

In any case, could you ensure ZOOKEEPER-1311 has been committed to the
3.4 branch before rolling the new release.

-Ivan

Actually, I think Ill leave the maven artifacts there but just update
the downloads page and remove the tarballs. That sounds reasonable?

mahadev

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:46 PM, Ivan Kelly <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
>>  As Ted mentioned, 3.4 client should be fine with 3.3 server. But
>> again, Ill be removing the 3.4.0 release from download and maven
>> repo's so it might impact you if you depend on the artifacts.
> Since the client should be fine, what is the advantage of removing
> from maven? Does anyone actually run a server from what is in maven?
> Hbase maybe?
>
> In any case, could you ensure ZOOKEEPER-1311 has been committed to the
> 3.4 branch before rolling the new release.
>
> -Ivan

Sounds good to me.

-Ivan

On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 01:50:19PM -0800, Mahadev Konar wrote:
> Actually, I think Ill leave the maven artifacts there but just update
> the downloads page and remove the tarballs. That sounds reasonable?

Good idea Mahadev. Let's just be (more) explicit in our messaging
about what's production ready and what's not.

Patrick

On Wed, Dec 7, 2011 at 1:56 PM,  <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> wrote:
> Sounds good to me.
>
> -Ivan
>
> On Wed, Dec 07, 2011 at 01:50:19PM -0800, Mahadev Konar wrote:
>> Actually, I think Ill leave the maven artifacts there but just update
>> the downloads page and remove the tarballs. That sounds reasonable?
>