Return-Path: 
 <dev-return-5585-apmail-cassandra-dev-archive=cassandra.apache.org@cassandra.apache.org>
X-Original-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@www.apache.org
Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3])
	by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id D26FC9064
	for <apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@www.apache.org>;
 Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:23:38 +0000 (UTC)
Received: (qmail 98251 invoked by uid 500); 29 Mar 2012 15:23:37 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@cassandra.apache.org
Received: (qmail 98222 invoked by uid 500); 29 Mar 2012 15:23:37 -0000
Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:dev-help@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:dev-unsubscribe@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:dev@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Id: <dev.cassandra.apache.org>
Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cassandra.apache.org
Received: (qmail 98214 invoked by uid 99); 29 Mar 2012 15:23:37 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:23:37 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0
	tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of benjamin.j.mccann@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.212.170 as permitted sender)
Received: from [209.85.212.170] (HELO mail-wi0-f170.google.com)
 (209.85.212.170)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 15:23:33 +0000
Received: by wibhr17 with SMTP id hr17so139872wib.1
        for <dev@cassandra.apache.org>; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:23:12 -0700 (PDT)
DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed;
        d=gmail.com; s=20120113;
        h=mime-version:sender:in-reply-to:references:date
         :x-google-sender-auth:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type;
        bh=41ELHO+lbgtao2lvc9SCWcggVCEjp/O0Ibe6TSBdA3s=;
        b=QreMqDH9R2xprtQGFvCOeMc/EcOsvKQMREpUFa9L+tHh1Nb/itb6lUrwBGQR1/ybyF
         F29yRO/6Tu2mGvjnvCVdZn8RPUHFntvKtxpnPNAIMRv7LNaHZEQr6z+Wm8yBeA0rs8Nu
         oN6HxqjJYlxJyOg6PWLugWVQVMVr4BkilhydQjRyJeDDcPanPK3snOIsRupHhJSTZsLh
         oVw4WYPELL07tUCHWGeMp2TapbM25wwHPUQ/f8U8C1NtSok60SK6LYP+E9V8sK225sw1
         T0AOQEAwkRRh2ExGLz+S/KDgra9SMmOu/TkBW6fFNon1sY6gWqia1hpKytXHRH+SKsHW
         Ffrw==
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.180.80.40 with SMTP id o8mr6633455wix.10.1333034592024; Thu,
 29 Mar 2012 08:23:12 -0700 (PDT)
Sender: benjamin.j.mccann@gmail.com
Received: by 10.216.230.95 with HTTP; Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:23:11 -0700 (PDT)
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAHe1ogtOCFKrUcByV=7xfrL9qSVQfwBzhA75nQir+jPdw0D_kw@mail.gmail.com>
References: 
 <CAH3cagMWrgptNtBLSQLrpmJFZFhoN64eqg5iaBp5Eu6=_Sx9aA@mail.gmail.com>
	<CAHe1ogtOCFKrUcByV=7xfrL9qSVQfwBzhA75nQir+jPdw0D_kw@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Thu, 29 Mar 2012 08:23:11 -0700
X-Google-Sender-Auth: evvfnjQfrUAHvl5W4QAJ4NcHvlA
Message-ID: 
 <CAH3cagN8AE4wLk=fKrn=PFuvbiJte6AUFZZ2zHXFXXKwAywAaQ@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Document storage
From: Ben McCann <ben@benmccann.com>
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d04428b8e54b88704bc634dcd
X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org

--f46d04428b8e54b88704bc634dcd
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Creating materialized paths may well be a possible solution.  If that were
the solution the community were to agree upon then I would like it to be a
standardized and well-documented best practice.  I asked how to store a
list of values on the user
list<http://www.mail-archive.com/user@cassandra.apache.org/msg21274.html>
and
no one suggested ["fieldName", <TimeUUID>]: "fieldValue".  It would be a
huge pain right now to create materialized paths like this for each of my
objects, so client library support would definitely be needed.  And the
client libraries should agree.  If Astyanax and lazyboy both add support
for materialized path and I write an object to Cassandra with Astyanax,
then I should be able to read it back with lazyboy.  The benefit of using
JSON/SMILE is that it's very clear that there's exactly one way to
serialize and deserialize the data and it's very easy.  It's not clear to
me that this is true using materialized paths.


On Thu, Mar 29, 2012 at 8:21 AM, Tyler Patterson <tpatterson@datastax.com>wrote:

> >
> >
> > Would there be interest in adding a JsonType?
>
>
> What about checking that data inserted into a JsonType is valid JSON? How
> would you do it, and would the overhead be something we are concerned
> about, especially if the JSON string is large?
>

--f46d04428b8e54b88704bc634dcd--