cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sylvain Lebresne (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-9745) Better validation for values
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2015 07:22:04 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9745?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14625968#comment-14625968
] 

Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-9745:
---------------------------------------------

bq. We want "real" triggers anyway, though.

I agree but I think it's a different ticket. I can see how triggers can be used to do validation,
but it's also not the most direct/use friendly way to do it imo. And being able to define
more precise db-enforced constraints on the schema easily is imo a nice thing to have. Not
going though the triggers machinery for that might also be more efficient.

bq. I'm not a fan of using UDFs for anything internal.

I don't want to make it sound like I think UDF is an absolute component of this ticket, I
mostly just wanted to say that we could and should add a bit more expressive validation for
values that just our current types, and so I've slightly generalized the title of this ticket.

I'm also fine with using {{CHECK}} constraints for this, if only because the proper way to
implement this will be to reuse our {{ColumnFilter}} implementation and that will ultimately
give us UDFs for free (but you'll still be able to do the most common validation without it,
so you'll be happy).


> Better validation for values
> ----------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-9745
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9745
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>            Reporter: Sylvain Lebresne
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.x
>
>
> The only server side validation we do for values is currently that they match their type.
Now that we have UDFs, we could allow to optionally specify a (boolean) value validation function
on a per-column basis. This would give us a pretty generic way of validating value, which
sounds useful to me.
> Once we have that, we could even add some syntactic sugar for some common type of validations,
like {{v int[0..100]}} for numbers between 0 and 100, or {{v text[20]}} for a string that
is not longer than 20, ... That's more of a follow up however.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message