incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Eric Evans <eev...@rackspace.com>
Subject Re: NoSQL, YesCQL?
Date Thu, 28 Oct 2010 21:56:42 GMT
On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 14:46 -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> Short answer: "YES Please, but we will still want a side channel for
> minimum overhead."

Ok.  Though I'm not sure I agree with the "minimum overhead" argument.

I've only done preliminary tests so far, but this seems on par (if not a
little faster) than Thrift is, and no effort to optimize has been made
(using a socket transport instead of HTTP for example would make a big
difference).

> Long answer: Query languages only work reliably when you have data
> binding assistance (insert "Bobby Tables" xkcd here).  However, they
> do
> have the wonderful property of evolving aggressively without requiring
> upgrades of the driver plumbing.  This is, of course, emphatically
> *not*
> true of anything like the current Thrift and Avro interfaces.  So
> that's
> why I say "Yes."  On the other hand, a very simple interface for very
> simple queries has a lot of value, too; see, for example,
> http://yoshinorimatsunobu.blogspot.com/2010/10/using-mysql-as-nosql-story-for.html  
> So that's why I think we will still want to bypass the full language
> for minimum latency in some circumstances. 

I'm also not sure I follow here either.  Do you mean simple for the
application developer?  CQL-using code should be considerably simpler
than the equivalent Thrift/Avro.

Thanks for the feedback!

-- 
Eric Evans
eevans@rackspace.com


Mime
View raw message