Mailing-List: contact commits-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Date: Thu, 15 Dec 2011 01:37:31 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Eric Evans (Commented) (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: commits@cassandra.apache.org
Message-ID: 
 <1100902865.13845.1323913051012.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
In-Reply-To: 
 <1067470530.58148.1302800105882.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org>
Subject: [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-2475) Prepared statements
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2475?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13169908#comment-13169908 ] 

Eric Evans commented on CASSANDRA-2475:
---------------------------------------

bq. Me, too. Feels like premature defensiveness to me. I think we're a lot more likely to have someone get bitten from PS number 51 failing, than from OOMing because of 100,000 if we just say "we'll keep them around until you close them or disconnect."

To clarify, you're saying you're in favor of putting no constraints whatsoever on the number of stored statements, and relying solely on clients to free them up?

Does this change at all (the perceived likelihood) if the number were 1,000 instead of 51? Or 10,000?

And, to be clear about what I was thinking: Short of a (seriously )buggy client, my expectation is that there would be no reason we couldn't hold as many of these statements as needed (with or without an API to remove them on close()).  Based on that assumption, the LRU map was a brake against buggy clients (and so should probably be much higher than 50), and the API to remove them was unnecessary.
                
> Prepared statements
> -------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-2475
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2475
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: API, Core
>    Affects Versions: 1.0.5
>            Reporter: Eric Evans
>            Assignee: Rick Shaw
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: cql
>             Fix For: 1.1
>
>         Attachments: 2475-v1.patch, 2475-v2.patch, 2475-v3.1.patch, 2475-v3.2-Thrift.patch, v1-0001-CASSANDRA-2475-prepared-statement-patch.txt, v1-0002-regenerated-thrift-java.txt, v2-0001-CASSANDRA-2475-rickshaw-2475-v3.1.patch.txt, v2-0002-rickshaw-2475-v3.2-Thrift.patch-w-changes.txt, v2-0003-eevans-increment-thrift-version-by-1-not-3.txt, v2-0004-eevans-misc-cleanups.txt, v2-0005-eevans-refactor-for-better-encapsulation-of-prepare.txt, v2-0006-eevans-log-queries-at-TRACE.txt, v2-0007-use-an-LRU-map-for-storage-of-prepared-statements.txt
>
>


--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira