some features may work with some storage engine but with others; for example, storing large blobs may be efficient in one storage engine while quite worse in another. perhaps some storage engines may want to SKIP some features or add more.
if a storage engine skips a feature, how should the query executor handle the response or lack of it? if a storage engine provides a new feature, how should that be enabled for that particular storage engine alone? On Wed, Apr 26, 2017 at 5:07 AM, Dikang Gu <dikan...@gmail.com> wrote: > I created several tickets to start the discussion, please free feel to > comment on the JIRAs. I'm also open for suggestions about other efficient > ways to discuss it. > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13474 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13475 > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13476 > > Thanks > Dikang. > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 9:53 PM, Dikang Gu <dikan...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > Thanks everyone for the feedback and suggestions! They are all very > > helpful. I'm looking forward to having more discussions about the > > implementation details. > > > > As the next step, we will be focus on three areas: > > 1. Pluggable storage engine interface. > > 2. Wide column support on RocksDB. > > 3. Streaming support on RocksDB. > > > > I will go ahead and create some JIRAs, to start the discussion about > > pluggable storage interface, and how to plug RocksDB into Cassandra. > > > > Please let me know your thoughts. > > > > Thanks! > > Dikang. > > > > On Mon, Apr 24, 2017 at 12:42 PM, Patrick McFadin <pmcfa...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Dikang, > >> > >> First I want to thank you and everyone else at Instragram for the > >> engineering talent you have devoted to the Cassandra project. Here's yet > >> another great example. > >> > >> He's going to hate me for dragging him into this, but Vijay > Parthasarathy > >> has done some exploratory work before on integrating non-java storage to > >> Cassandra. Might be helpful person to consult. > >> > >> Patrick > >> > >> > >> > >> On Sun, Apr 23, 2017 at 4:25 PM, Nate McCall <zznat...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> > >> > > Please take a look and let me know your thoughts. I think the > biggest > >> > > latency win comes from we get rid of most Java garbages created by > >> > current > >> > > read/write path and compactions, which reduces the JVM overhead and > >> makes > >> > > the latency to be more predictable. > >> > > > >> > > >> > I want to put this here for the record: > >> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2995 > >> > > >> > There are some valid points in the above about increased surface area > >> > and end-user confusion. That said, just under six years is a long > >> > time. I think we are a more mature project now and I completely agree > >> > with others about the positive impacts of testability this would > >> > inherently provide. > >> > > >> > +1 from me. > >> > > >> > Dikang, thank you for opening this discussion and sharing your efforts > >> so > >> > far. > >> > > >> > > > > > > > > -- > > Dikang > > > > > > > -- > Dikang >
