Return-Path: 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 698CD102DE for ; Thu, 19 Dec 2013 19:50:33 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 22968 invoked by uid 500); 19 Dec 2013 19:50:32 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 22952 invoked by uid 500); 19 Dec 2013 19:50:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: moderator for dev@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 83043 invoked by uid 99); 19 Dec 2013 19:31:54 -0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2.3 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_MED,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of markuspapadakis@me.com designates 17.172.204.240 as permitted sender) X-Proofpoint-Virus-Version: vendor=fsecure engine=2.50.10432:5.11.87,1.0.14,0.0.0000 definitions=2013-12-19_07:2013-12-19,2013-12-19,1970-01-01 signatures=0 X-Proofpoint-Spam-Details: rule=notspam policy=default score=0 spamscore=0 suspectscore=3 phishscore=0 adultscore=0 bulkscore=0 classifier=spam adjust=0 reason=mlx scancount=1 engine=7.0.1-1308280000 definitions=main-1312190128 Content-type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 MIME-version: 1.0 (Mac OS X Mail 7.1 \(1827\)) Subject: Re: C* engine From: Mark Papadakis In-reply-to: Date: Thu, 19 Dec 2013 21:31:29 +0200 Content-transfer-encoding: quoted-printable Message-id: References: To: dev@cassandra.apache.org, Roman Vasilyev X-Mailer: Apple Mail (2.1827) X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org There is a _lot_ of room for performance improvements, both in terms of = design decisions but even more so in terms of implementation specifics = on there. I don=92t think it makes sense (any kind of sense) to rewrite to C or = any other language, given the amount of work and(perhaps most = importantly) testing that was put on C* so far, but, choosing a = different language is not what=92s most important here in terms of = extracting performance; improving existing codebase is the right thing = to do, however, as I understand it, improving what=92s already there in = terms of stability and conformance and releasing new features is a = higher priority item for the developers, for now. It will happen though. Mark Papadakis On Dec 19, 2013, at 9:22 PM, Roman Vasilyev = wrote: > Hello, >=20 > Don't want to rise "holy war". Just let me share my crazy thoughts. > I believe it could improve Cassandra speed and robustness. >=20 > What people will say if I propose to have Cassandra engine written in = C/C++, and this engine will give you ability to run extensions in Java, = Groovy and bunch other languages like Perl/Python/Ruby? >=20 > I just want to understand for myself does this solution will be useful = or I'm looking in wrong direction? >=20 > Thank you for reading.