[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7622?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15320844#comment-15320844
]
Robert Stupp commented on CASSANDRA-7622:
-----------------------------------------
I think, we need some "routing" ability for statements against virtual tables -
whether that's implemented as a {{WHERE node='1.2.3.4'}} at the one extreme or
using some sort of {{Statement.setTargetNode()}} method in the drivers.
Otherwise we have absolutely no control which coordinator executes a statement
- and for metrics/configs/etc it is important to know which node executes the
statement. IMO, a where-clause looks best.
+1 on starting with a {{SHOW VARIABLES}} - and just with that and see how it
works - especially with the explicit statement routing problematic. Metrics
could come next - they have their own pitfalls. Then we have some experience
with this "distributed administration via CQL" and can probably properly tackle
configuration changes and administrative commands.
> Implement virtual tables
> ------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-7622
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7622
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Tupshin Harper
> Assignee: Jeff Jirsa
> Fix For: 3.x
>
>
> There are a variety of reasons to want virtual tables, which would be any
> table that would be backed by an API, rather than data explicitly managed and
> stored as sstables.
> One possible use case would be to expose JMX data through CQL as a
> resurrection of CASSANDRA-3527.
> Another is a more general framework to implement the ability to expose yaml
> configuration information. So it would be an alternate approach to
> CASSANDRA-7370.
> A possible implementation would be in terms of CASSANDRA-7443, but I am not
> presupposing.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
