Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 82A86E20E for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 21:43:15 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 53518 invoked by uid 500); 27 Nov 2012 21:43:13 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 53478 invoked by uid 500); 27 Nov 2012 21:43:13 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 53469 invoked by uid 99); 27 Nov 2012 21:43:13 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 21:43:13 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-0.0 required=5.0 tests=RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of bill@dehora.net designates 207.7.108.242 as permitted sender) Received: from [207.7.108.242] (HELO chilco.textdrive.com) (207.7.108.242) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 21:43:06 +0000 Received: from [192.168.1.155] (unknown [79.97.10.130]) by chilco.textdrive.com (Postfix) with ESMTP id 747CDF11C8 for ; Tue, 27 Nov 2012 21:42:45 +0000 (UTC) Message-ID: <50B533D2.3090508@dehora.net> Date: Tue, 27 Nov 2012 21:42:42 +0000 From: =?ISO-8859-1?Q?Bill_de_h=D3ra?= User-Agent: Mozilla/5.0 (X11; Linux i686; rv:17.0) Gecko/17.0 Thunderbird/17.0 MIME-Version: 1.0 To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Generic questions over Cassandra 1.1/1.2 References: <30197689.409821353884331038.JavaMail.defaultUser@defaultHost> In-Reply-To: Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org > I'm not sure I always > understand what people mean by "schema less" > exactly and I'm curious. For 'schema less', given this - {{{ cqlsh> use example; cqlsh:example> CREATE TABLE users ( ... user_name varchar, ... password varchar, ... gender varchar, ... session_token varchar, ... state varchar, ... birth_year bigint, ... PRIMARY KEY (user_name) ... ); }}} I expect this would not cause an unknown identifier error - {{{ INSERT INTO users (user_name, password, extra, moar) VALUES ('bob', 'secret', 'a', 'b'); }}} but definitions vary. Bill On 26/11/12 09:18, Sylvain Lebresne wrote: > On Mon, Nov 26, 2012 at 8:41 AM, aaron morton > wrote: > > > Is there any noticeable performance difference between thrift or CQL3? > > Off the top of my head it's within 5% (maybe 10%) under stress tests. > See Eric's talk at the Cassandra SF conference for the exact numbers. > > Eric's benchmark results was that "normal" queries were slightly slower > but prepared one (and in real life, I see no good reason not to prepare > statements) were actually slightly faster. > > > CQL 3 requires a schema, however altering the schema is easier. And > in 1.2 will support concurrent schema modifications. > > Thrift API is still schema less. > > Sorry to hijack this thread, but I'd be curious (like seriously, I'm not > trolling) to understand what you mean by "CQL 3 requires a schema" but > "Thrift API is still schema less". Basically I'm not sure I always > understand what people mean by "schema less" exactly and I'm curious. > > -- > Sylvain