incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremy Hanna <>
Subject Re: plugins/triggers/coprocessors
Date Fri, 11 Feb 2011 17:23:57 GMT
Thanks Maxim - I'll just go ahead and BCC you and Hentschel and move the discussion to the
dev list.

Based on the comments on 1311 - did you have anything else to add to that - could we unify
around 1016 or 1311 and work on getting that to a general state of acceptance?  Were there
any that were able to do some work on either these days?  Or are we not at that point?

On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:36 AM, Maxim Grinev wrote:

> Hi all,
> Jeremy, thanks for starting the discussion! We don't follow the dev list closely so it
was a good idea to email it directly. 
> It really seems to be about the same. To unify the discussions, we propose to list the
features of each solution and compare them feature by feature. Here is the feature list for
> 	• Triggers are set on a column family. Triggers are executed for each mutation to
the column family and parametrized by the mutation.  
> 	• The mutation, which is the trigger parameter, is the "new" value. The trigger cannot
see the "old" value.
> 	• Triggers are executed asynchronously some time after the write which fired it is
acknowledged to the client.
> 	• Triggers are executed once during normal execution. We guarantee "at least once"
execution in case of node failures.
> Cheers,
> Maxim  
> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Jeremy Hanna
> <> wrote:
> > Hey guys,
> >
> > I was just wondering if it would be a good time to unify discussions on plugins/triggers/coprocessors?
> >
> >
> >
> >
> > I was going to email the dev list but since I don't know if all of you follow the
dev list and you guys are the ones that expressed the most interest, I thought I would start
> Yeah, they're all tackling basically the same problem. For which we
> should have a single solution.
> -ryan

View raw message