Change Details

We recently changed the format of new objects written in the journal: D7003 However, `offset_bytes` is going to be renamed to simply `offset` in the model, as we are getting rid of the numeric `offset`. However, this will introduce yet another change to the journal format, and a somewhat confusing one. What should we do about this? 1. keep existing objects as-is, with a mix of `offset_bytes`, a numeric `offset`, and bytes `offset` 2. keep it as-is, with a mix of `offset_bytes` and a numeric `offset` 3. rewrite every object to use a bytes `offset` Option 1 is the hardest on future consumers, and option 3 has the highest risk for corrupting existing data. Option 2 is a middle ground.

We recently changed the format of new objects written in the journal: D7003 However, `offset_bytes` is going to be renamed to simply `offset` in the model, as we are getting rid of the numeric `offset`. However, this will introduce yet another change to the journal format, and a somewhat confusing one. What should we do about this? 1. keep existing objects as-is, with a mix of `offset_bytes`, a numeric `offset`, and bytes `offset` 2. keep the schema as it is currently, with a mix of `offset_bytes` and a numeric `offset` 3. rewrite every object to use a bytes `offset` Option 1 is the hardest on future consumers, and option 3 has the highest risk for corrupting existing data. Option 2 is a middle ground.

We recently changed the format of new objects written in the journal: D7003 However, `offset_bytes` is going to be renamed to simply `offset` in the model, as we are getting rid of the numeric `offset`. However, this will introduce yet another change to the journal format, and a somewhat confusing one. What should we do about this? 1. keep existing objects as-is, with a mix of `offset_bytes`, a numeric `offset`, and bytes `offset` 2. keep it as-isthe schema as it is currently, with a mix of `offset_bytes` and a numeric `offset` 3. rewrite every object to use a bytes `offset` Option 1 is the hardest on future consumers, and option 3 has the highest risk for corrupting existing data. Option 2 is a middle ground.