Mailing-List: contact dev-help@asterixdb.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@asterixdb.apache.org
Subject: Re: Change in merge policy syntax
To: "dev@asterixdb.apache.org" <dev@asterixdb.apache.org>
References: <43F3FBA1-205B-466D-BD05-936279E2D068@gmail.com>
From: Mike Carey <dtabass@gmail.com>
Message-ID: <91f057ad-85b5-2940-6998-7cd38d097bbf@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 27 Nov 2017 22:10:43 -0800
User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (Macintosh; Intel Mac OS X 10.11; rv:52.0)
 Gecko/20100101 Thunderbird/52.4.0
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <43F3FBA1-205B-466D-BD05-936279E2D068@gmail.com>
Content-Type: multipart/alternative;
 boundary="------------88954D89207ED8794BD08544"
Content-Language: en-US
archived-at: Tue, 28 Nov 2017 06:10:53 -0000

--------------88954D89207ED8794BD08544
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8; format=flowed
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

+1

Could you share the resulting full proposed BNF rule for the CREATE 
DATASET statement?


On 11/27/17 7:24 PM, abdullah alamoudi wrote:
> Dear devs,
> We would like to get your input on changing the syntax of the merge policy definition.
>
> Current syntax:
> <USING> <COMPACTION> <POLICY> prefix_merge (("number"="123"),("size"="456"));
>
> Proposed syntax
> <WITH> {"compaction policy": {"name": "prefix_merge", "parameters": {"number": 123,"size": 456}}};
>
> Advantages:
> 1. Compaction and policy are not key words anymore.
> 2. Use a JSON for key value pairs instead of a strange syntax.
>
> Thoughts?


--------------88954D89207ED8794BD08544--