incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Sylvain Lebresne <sylv...@datastax.com>
Subject Re: 2.0
Date Sat, 01 Dec 2012 08:03:54 GMT
I agree on 2.0.

For the thrift part, we've said clearly that we wouldn't remove it any time
soon so let's stick to that. Besides, I would agree it's too soon anyway.
What we can do however in the relatively short term on that front, is to
pull thrift in it's own jar (we've almost removed all internal dependencies
on thrift, and the few remaining ones will be easy to kill) and make that
jar optional if you don't want to use it.

--
Sylvain


On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 2:52 AM, Ray Slakinski <ray.slakinski@gmail.com>wrote:

> I agree, I don't think its a great idea to drop thrift until the back
> end tools are 100% compatible and have some level of agreement from the
> major users of
> Cassandra.
>
> Paying off technical dept though I'm all for, and I think its key to the
> long term success of the application. Right now Supercolumns to someone
> new coming to the system might think "Hey, these things look great. Lets
> use them" and in a few months time hate all things that are cassandra.
>
> Ray Slakinski
>
> On 12/01, Jonathan Ellis 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