I agree, go with whats best in Avro and the CoSC always seemed like a hack.
IMHO moving to avro is a good opportunity to make breaking changes. Clients will need to be re-coded anyway.
Aaron
Right. We could get rid of it with avro. We just wanted to make sure that for client developers there weren't hidden downsides we weren't considering.
On Sep 1, 2010, at 11:31 AM, Nick Telford wrote:
> Hi Jeremy,
>
> I believe CoSC only exists because Thrift cannot handle inheritance? If avro
> does, then surely it would make sense to diverge from the Thrift API in
> order to create something a little easier to work with.
>
> Regards,
>
> Nick Telford
>
> On 1 September 2010 15:52, Jeremy Hanna <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>> We're doing some work today to help Avro implementation along and the topic
>> of ColumnOrSuperColumn came up.
>>
>> Would people be happy or sad if Avro didn't have the ColumnOrSuperColumn
>> and instead had two different classes for that purpose? Then in whatever
>> language you would cast an object to either Column or SuperColumn.
>>
>> That is, would it help or hinder client development to diverge between Avro
>> and Thrift in that way?
