asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Carey <dtab...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Time to deprecate AQL?
Date Fri, 08 Sep 2017 05:54:42 GMT
Or possibly how to retire it and then re-do similarity joins using the 
join infrastructure ideas discussed a year or so ago, perhaps.  (We 
should think about whether or not the time it would take to do SQL+++ 
might be better used to not use that approach anymore - it was an 
interesting experiment at the time it was done, but it's probably worth 
having a revisiting discussion 5 years later - and also whether the 
algorithm as it was invented is still the preferred one to support - 
though the required SQL+++ query would surely be an interesting SQL++ 
optimizer test... :-))


On 9/7/17 10:21 PM, Chen Li wrote:
> Let's discuss how to move AQL+ to SQL++ after Taewoo comes back.
>
> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangsaeu@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> For similarity join, we use AQL+ that is based on AQL. I think deprecating
>> (not removing) AQL is OK. Ultimately, AQL+ should be converted to SQL++ :-)
>>
>> Best,
>> Taewoo
>>
>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Steven Jacobs <sjaco002@ucr.edu> wrote:
>>
>>> I’ll give the BADest +1 I can :)
>>> Steven
>>>
>>> On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:50 PM Gerald Sangudi <sangudi@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>> :-)
>>>>
>>>> On Sep 7, 2017 11:44 AM, "Michael Carey" <mjcarey@ics.uci.edu> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> As AsterixDB evolves, and additional features are added - e.g.,
>> DISTINCT
>>>> aggregate support, or properly implemented query-bodied functions,
>>>> supporting two query languages is hugely expensive:  Updating two
>>> grammars,
>>>> parsers, rules, tests, ... IMO it is time to let go of AQL as an
>>> externally
>>>> supported interface to AsterixDB and only have SQL++ going forward.  I
>>>> think "everyone" has migrated - and if not we should force that
>>> migration.
>>>> (Cloudberry is on SQL++ nowadays, BAD is on SQL++ nowadays, ...)  Any
>>>> objections?  If not, I think we should make this decision officially
>> and
>>>> stop putting energy into carrying the AQL legacy around with us.
>>> Thoughts?


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