asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Steven Jacobs <sjaco...@ucr.edu>
Subject Re: Metadata changes
Date Mon, 14 Dec 2015 19:16:33 GMT
It's a new attribute, but it's a closed field, which means it isn't
backwards compatible.
Steven

On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 11:13 AM, Ian Maxon <imaxon@uci.edu> wrote:

> For 1), I guess the question is whether it would be a backwards
> compatible change. Since it's just a new attribute (right?...), and it
> is also sort of a new feature rather than a fix for something that was
> critically broken, I would tend toward putting it on master. If it's
> not backwards compatible though maybe it needs more careful
> consideration.
>
> -Ian
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Steven Jacobs <sjaco002@ucr.edu> wrote:
> > Hi all,
> > I'm implementing a change so that datasets can use datatypes from
> alternate
> > data verses (previously the type and set had to be from the same
> > dataverse). Unfortunately this means another change for Dataset Metadata
> > (which will now store the dataverse for its type).
> >
> > As such, I had a couple of questions:
> >
> > 1) Should this change be thrown into the release branch, as it is another
> > Metadata change?
> >
> > 2) In implementing this change, I've been looking at the Metadata
> secondary
> > indexes. I had a discussion with Ildar, and it seems the thread on
> Metadata
> > secondary indexes being "hacked" has been lost. Is this also something
> that
> > should get into the release? Is there anyone currently looking at it?
> >
> > Steven
>

Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message