Redis release cycle page states
Support
Older versions are not supported as we try very hard to make the Redis API mostly backward compatible. Upgrading to newer versions is usually trivial.
For example, if the current stable release is 2.6.x, we accept bug reports and provide support >for the previous stable release (2.4.x), but not for older ones such as 2.2.x.
When 2.8 becomes the current stable release, the 2.6.x will be the oldest supported release.
Does this mean that currently supported versions are 6.0 (latest stable version 6.0.6) and 5.0 (previous stable version 5.0.9), and older versions such as (4.0.x, 3.2.x, 2.8.x) are not supported?
Thanks in advance.
Related
Currently I have a single DC cluster with 3 nodes running 4.1.7 version of Scylla. This setup has been running for a long time and I don't want to make changes to this DC, if possible. Now I have a requirement to add another DC cluster with 3 nodes. Can I set up this new DC with the latest stable version of Scylla? Will the two DCs be able to communicate with each other without any issues? Or am I forced to upgrade the existing DC to the latest version?
Scylla supports rolling upgrades, which means you can indeed upgrade just some of the nodes in the cluster while the rest are still running the older version. The cluster should be able to fully work in this state - including the communication between old and new nodes. Not all upgrade paths are equally supported or have been equally tested, obviously, but most "interesting" upgrade paths (a newer release in the same major version, the next major version) are indeed supported.
That being said, while staying at a half-upgraded state for a long time is possible, it is not recommended. It also means that whatever new features or improved algorithms were introduced in the new version, the new nodes will need to avoid them until the full cluster is upgraded.
OSS 4.1.7 is a pretty old OSS release from Oct 2020. The assumption that you can add another DC running OSS 5.0 (latest OSS release from 10 days ago) to the existing cluster, is a bit of a risky one.
The supported upgrade path (QA tested) is from OSS 4.6 to 5.0. You can read more about the upgrade path here: https://docs.scylladb.com/upgrade/upgrade-opensource/
The tested upgrade route is via minor versions 4.1 --> 4.2 --> 4.3 --> 4.4 --> 4.5 --> 4.6 --> 5.0, jumping multiple minor version should work, but we can't say that it was tested.
I want to keep the my Apache HTTP server to its latest version. So I check https://httpd.apache.org/ and it says 2.4.48 is the latest version. I also check https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Apache_HTTP_Server#Versions and it says the latest version is 2.4.48 (June 1, 2021; 2 months ago[2])
However, I also see this https://httpd.apache.org/docs/trunk/ and it seems there is 2.5/2.6 version available. I click "New features with Apache 2.5/2.6" link in the page, but get "page not found" error. So, what is the problem?
Apache httpd uses the classic three numbers versioning scheme
Major.Minor.Patchlevel
and uses the Minor version number to distinguish between development versions (odd Minor number) and stable, released versions (even Minor number).
So 2.4.52 is the most recent released version as of the time of this writing.
The 2.5.x versions also exist, being in-progress unstable and unreleased development versions targetted at developers only. Once the 2.5 series matures and is considered to be ready for a release, it will become the 2.6 stable series, successor of the 2.4 stable series. (Just as the 2.4 series is the successor of the 2.2 series, with all 2.3.x versions being unstable development versions leading up to 2.4.0.)
There is not version 2.6.x yet, as development hasn't finished so far.
Unfortunately, I could not find any official informatin on the Apache httpd website detailing this.
What is the expiry date / end of life date for Redis 3.0.5?
Is there any official document announcing the end of life date for Redis 3.0.5?
according to Redis release cycle
Older versions are not supported as we try very hard to make the Redis
API mostly backward compatible. Upgrading to newer versions is usually
trivial.
For example, if the current stable release is 2.6.x, we accept bug
reports and provide support for the previous stable release (2.4.x),
but not for older ones such as 2.2.x.
When 2.8 becomes the current stable release, the 2.6.x will be the
oldest supported release.
Since redis ver 6.0.* is the latest version today, and the previous stable release is 5.0.* then any previous version is no longer supported
What is the most reliable source to find the latest version number?
Is it github?
And if yes, which version should I take?
Right now, here is what I see:
Should I take the 1.0.2k?
But then 1.1.0d seems like it is more recent (if it follows semantic versioning). What do the letters actually mean?
Note: in my case this is to compile an openssl version with nginx.
Last time I picked (quite randomly) the version 1.0.2h which seemed the latest at the time.
So what is the process to follow to find the latest openssl version?
https://www.openssl.org/ shows which version are current and supported.
Currently there are two major versions in development: 1.1.0 and 1.0.2. 1.1.0 is newer and has more features. But due to the cleanups between 1.0.2 and 1.1.0 lots of undocumented API (i.e. things which never were an official API but got used anyway since no official API existed) got broken and not all software works or works stable with 1.1.0 yet. Also, 1.1.0 tends to introduce not only features but also bugs faster than 1.0.2 when looking at the release history. And with 1.1.0 the chance is higher that documented behavior changes even between patch releases.
Thus if you need the new features with 1.1.0 then go with it. If you prefer a more stable version with a smaller chance of bugs use 1.0.2. In all cases you should always use the latest patch release and keep using it if new patches get released or backport security patches.
I'd like to get the latest Mono 2.x version.
According to the official Mono release history page it is 2.10.9
According to what appears to be the official archive it is 2.11.4
However the latest modification date in the archive above for a 2.X release actually belongs to 2.10.12
There is no mentioned of the latter two versions in Mono's website (according to Google at least).
Any ideas what's going on?
I found this blog post that suggests 2.11.4 may be an Alpha release (see the comments). Perhaps the same is true for 2.10.12, and the latest stable version was indeed 2.10.9?
A similar questions arises for the latest version of MonoDevelop supporting Mono 2.X.
According to a Xamarin rep in their mailing list it is 2.8.6.5, but the GitHub release history shows 2.9.6, and the following link works: http://download.xamarin.com/monodevelop/Mac/MonoDevelop-2.9.5.dmg.
Is it again a case of an Alpha / Beta release ?
Mono 2.10.12 is the latest stable 2.x release (although 2.10.10, 2.10.11, and 2.10.12 were really just MacOS-specific releases, iirc).
Mono 2.11.x releases were previews for Mono 3.0.
The latest stable 2.x release of MonoDevelop was 2.8.6.5.
MonoDevelop 2.9.x releases were previews for 3.0.
At the time, we used the same version scheme as the Linux kernel for both Mono and MonoDevelop, where an even minor version meant stable and an odd minor version meant development/unstable/preview/alpha/whatever-you-want-to-call-it.
I think Mono still uses the same version scheme, but MonoDevelop no longer does (starting with 5.0). For example, MonoDevelop 5.1 is stable even though the minor version number is odd.