I have found specifications for openflow 1.5 and openflow 1.4 and they can't seem to have a change log, is there any change log available to know the enhancements of the new version?
In the OpenFlow 1.5.1 document linked in your question, Appendix B, "Release Notes", describes the changes made between OpenFlow versions. Section B.19 on page 277 describes the changes made between OpenFlow 1.4.1 and OpenFlow 1.5.0. You can also view the changes between prior OpenFlow versions in Sections B.1 through B.18.
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.
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.
I am trying to program a virtual network on OpenFlow by OpenDaylight.
What is the difference between Neon, Fluorine-SR2, and Oxygen-SR4?
There is no major change between these releases for the OpenFlow plugin. To see exact changes you can check the release notes for every release in this link: https://docs.opendaylight.org/en/stable-fluorine/release-notes/projects/openflowplugin.html
I have NVIDIA driver v 378.92 installed, and according to the nvidia website since driver version 377.14, driver supports vulkan api 1.0.42.1. My vulkan SDK api version is 1.0.42.2. However when I check for my device support info, using vkjson_info.exe in the vulkan SDK, there's stated that only apiVersion 1.0.37 is supported.
I'm a bit confused how this works, can anyone enlighten this?
The reported version could be limited by the Vulkan Loader/Runtime it finds. First is this Windows or Linux?
If you have the Vulkan SDK 1.0.42.2 installed, can you run the VIA tool? It should generate an HTML output. If you look at the "Runtimes" section, you should see which ones are available and which one it's using. For best results, try running it from the same folder as vkjson_info.exe. But, it should give you a good idea if you just run it anywhere.
"1.0.42.1" is not a Vulkan version. Vulkan only has three levels (i.e. major.minor.patch). So the "1.0.37" is likely correct and the "1.0.42.1" is likely the version of some LunarG Vulkan SDK or possibly Vulkan Runtime that comes with it.
There are usually several types of versions flying around:
The Vulkan driver version. It is of the major.minor.patch format and it is in VkPhysicalDeviceProperties::apiVersion or can be obtained by a tool such as VHCV.
Optionally SDK/Layers version on the runtime machine. LunarG Vulkan SDK versioning of the form vulkan_major.vulkan_minor.vulkan_patch.optionally_SDK_patch.
Vulkan Runtime of the runtime machine — It is basically The Vulkan Loader dll (if the application uses that). Both SDK and drivers install this (and coexist) and they use their own versioning scheme. The SDK version also installs the Validation Layers to the system.
SDK/Header on the application developer machine. Versioning as described above. The vulkan.h header is always 1.0 and so has only single number version — VK_HEADER_VERSION (which matches the Vulkan patch version — but does not have to in the future)
SDK/Header on the driver developer machine. Versioning as described above. Should really be the same as Vulkan driver version. And most likely the Vulkan RT installed by the driver will be the same version. But I think I have seen this to differ.
It should not matter, because all patch versions are supposed to be both-ways compatible (in reality not really — there were some changes, but driver makers seem to keep up so far providing updated drivers, so it is not an issue). And in fact that is the only thing I could find in the driver documentation: "Vulkan 1.0" support.
I hope you are so enlightened now that you reached the ultimate state of boredom.
377 is a beta version driver from https://developer.nvidia.com/vulkan-driver . There is no guarantee that beta feature will be carried over to the subsequent release version. And according to http://vulkan.gpuinfo.org/listreports.php it didn't (378 indeed have 1.0.37 and 377 have 1.0.42 and more importantly has the extensions you want to try). Continue to use the beta for now if you want the features within it. As for Layers and other SDK features you should not need newer drivers — in fact you should always use the latest to benefit from Validation Layer bugfixes and improvements.
I am looking at Nexus 3.00 OSS Edition.
The recent release of Nexus 3.0 (OSS Edition) seems to have dropped support for rpms.
I don't see any specific note declaring that they are going to be dropping some features from 2.x.
So i am not sure whether the rpm/ yum repositry support is actually removed Or is it being supported differently with the new Nexus 3.0 or this feature has been made exclusive for the Paid version.
Not yet. The progress of this can be tracked in http://issues.sonatype.org/browse/NEXUS-10191. Feel free to watch for release details.