incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From SriSatish Ambati <>
Subject Re: Reducing confusion around client libraries
Date Fri, 03 Dec 2010 20:26:25 GMT
This is not the first or last of these discussions:

Need for standards/good clients to access Databases has happened before one
in the early 90s.. leading to emergence of an sql-92 standard. Fast forward
to today: No database/data management software out there distributes the
server software without the necessary client drivers/software to
access/insert data. Whether in the form of default clients, type-4 drivers
etc. One could argue that a data store is incomplete without having robust
client libraries to manipulate data in there.

Notice that the end user still keeps (& has kept in other instances) the
option to install his chosen client if it performs better or works
well/supports his particular usecase well. It does not necessarily limit
choice but ups the quality barrier for distributing/creating new clients (as
opposed to contributing the existing one.) Having a default one makes
integration into larger stacks dead simple.

What we have today is power users writing their own robust features (for ex,
Thread/Connection Pooling, proper exception handling) that are not
necessarily available in all the clients & fragmented development leading to
poor overall experience. (Not to say the underlying coupling with Thrift:
Client software could inadvertently upgrade/modify thrift libraries leading
to a bit of chaos) While this is fine for experimental stages it is not a
sign of  matured stacks. Not having a good client will limit the power of
Apache Cassandra and in the end drive users towards non-free client

+1 For having a default client library maintained and distributed with

For I believe this would make for faster wider adoption of Apache Cassandra
and bring it to a lot of new users and workloads with the goodness that
comes with being under ASF.


On Fri, Dec 3, 2010 at 12:13 PM, Eric Evans <> wrote:

> On Fri, 2010-12-03 at 13:46 -0600, Tyler Hobbs wrote:
> > Personally, I like the Mongo drivers page:
> >
> >
> > I like the clear distinction between preferred and alternative clients
> > without a lot of clutter about release dates and supported versions.
> > How do we make that distinction, though?  A "supported by Riptano"
> > section is one option, but that doesn't even encompass all of the
> > preferred clients.
> This sounds like you're suggesting that we place an "official according
> to Riptano" section on the project wiki.  That sounds... worse.
> --
> Eric Evans

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