[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4734?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13475192#comment-13475192
]
Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-4734:
---------------------------------------------
bq. Is there a CL.DEFAULT now then, or do you pass null?
You pass null.
bq. How do we deal w/ different default CL in a batch?
That's a good point, but it's more a problem of CASSANDRA-4448 than of this
patch really. And the solution we've adopted in CASSANDRA-4448 was to refuse a
batch without an explicitly set CL unless all the default CLs are the same
(that being said I forgot to re-add that part to my v2 but I'll update the
patch shortly).
bq. Seems a lot cleaner to me to leave it protocol-only
As said above, I think that CASSANDRA-4448 and this are fairly orthogonal
problems. In particular, it was my mistake to think in my first version that
moving the CL to the protocol level was making CASSANDRA-4448 in any way
irrelevant but it's really not.
> Move CQL3 consistency to protocol
> ---------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-4734
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4734
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: API
> Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
> Assignee: Sylvain Lebresne
> Fix For: 1.2.0 beta 2
>
> Attachments: 0001-Move-consistency-level-to-the-protocol-level-2.txt,
> 0001-Move-consistency-level-to-the-protocol-level.txt,
> 0002-Remove-remains-of-4448.txt, 0002-Thrift-generated-file-diffs-2.txt,
> 0003-Thrift-generated-file-diffs.txt
>
>
> Currently, in CQL3, you set the consistency level of an operation in
> the language, eg 'SELECT * FROM foo USING CONSISTENCY QUORUM'. It now
> looks like this was a mistake, and that consistency should be set at
> the protocol level, i.e. as a separate parameter along with the query.
> The reasoning is that the CL applies to the guarantee provided by the
> operation being successful, not to the query itself. Specifically,
> having the CL being part of the language means that CL is opaque to
> low level client libraries without themselves parsing the CQL, which
> we want to avoid. Thus,
> - Those libraries can't implement automatic retries policy, where a query
> would be retried with a smaller CL. (I'm aware that this is often a Bad
> Idea, but it does have legitimate uses and not having that available is seen
> as a regression from the Thrift api.)
> - We had to introduce CASSANDRA-4448 to allow the client to configure some
> form of default CL since the library can't handle that anymore, which is
> hackish.
> - Executing prepared statements with different CL requires preparing multiple
> statements.
> - CL only makes sense for BATCH operations as a whole, not the sub-statements
> within the batch. Currently CQL3 "fixes" that by validating the given CLs
> match, but it would be much more clear if the CL was on the protocol side.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
