incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: 2.0
Date Mon, 03 Dec 2012 17:25:38 GMT
- world

Hi Jonathan,

This topic may have been discussed elsewhere, or my memory is worse off
than I thought, but what is our long term vision for thrift support?
Admittedly, I need to learn much more about the binary CQL protocol, and I
understand Ed's concerns, as well (more acutely now) about existing
installations, but we probably wouldn't have dreamt up a new client
interface/protocol if we went planning, at some point, on retiring the old
one. And, also, I missed the Avro debate from the past, so I'm not sure how
much that affects current and future thinking.

After raising the issue here on the dev list, it certainly seems like 2.0
is premature for a full-on switch over, and Ed raised some interesting
metrics to consider when we could declare the CQL protocol as 'accepted'.
I'm curious as to how you are seeing it roll out.

Thanks for your time,

-Jason





On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 2:49 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbellis@gmail.com> wrote:

> As attractive as it would be to clean house, I think we owe it to our
> users to keep Thrift around for the forseeable future rather than
> orphan all Thrift-using applications (which is virtually everyone) on
> 1.2.
>
> On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Jason Brown <jasedbrown@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi Jonathan,
> >
> > I'm in favor of paying off the technical debt, as well, and I wonder if
> > there is value in removing support for thrift with 2.0? We're currently
> in
> > 'do as little as possible' mode with thrift, so should we aggressively
> cast
> > it off and push the binary CQL protocol? Seems like a jump to '2.0',
> along
> > with the other initiatives, would be a reasonable time/milestone to do
> so.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > -Jason
> >
> >
> > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbellis@gmail.com>
> wrote:
> >
> >> The more I think about it, the more I think we should call 1.2-next,
> >> 2.0.  I'd like to spend some time paying off our technical debt:
> >>
> >> - replace supercolumns with composites (CASSANDRA-3237)
> >> - rewrite counters (CASSANDRA-4775)
> >> - improve storage engine support for wide rows
> >> - better stage management to improve latency (disruptor? lightweight
> >> threads?  custom executor + queue?)
> >> - improved repair (CASSANDRA-3362, 2699)
> >>
> >> Of course, we're planning some new features as well:
> >> - triggers (CASSANDRA-1311)
> >> - improved query fault tolerance (CASSANDRA-4705)
> >> - row size limits (CASSANDRA-3929)
> >> - cql3 integration for hadoop (CASSANDRA-4421)
> >> - improved caching (CASSANDRA-1956, 2864)
> >>
> >> --
> >> Jonathan Ellis
> >> Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
> >> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> >> @spyced
> >>
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Ellis
> Project Chair, Apache Cassandra
> co-founder, http://www.datastax.com
> @spyced
>

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