[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6147?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13924168#comment-13924168
]
Tyler Hobbs commented on CASSANDRA-6147:
----------------------------------------
bq. The only wrinkle would be a new client talking to an older version of the
server. Depending on the server version the server may reject or not reject the
operation.
Existing clients are already required to supply a timestamp, so this change
would not affect them. It's not a problem for older C* versions to reject a
new feature. And if you're running a mixed cluster, you can't expect the old
nodes to support all the features of the new nodes. In short, +1 on making
timestamps optional for deletes.
> Allow Thrift opt-in to server-side timestamps
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-6147
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6147
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Components: API
> Reporter: Edward Capriolo
> Assignee: Edward Capriolo
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 2.1 beta2
>
>
> Thrift users are still forced to generate timestamps on the client side.
> Currently the way the thrift bindings are generated users are forced to
> supply timestamps. There are two solutions I see.
> * -1 as timestamp means "generate on the server side"
> This is a breaking change, for those using -1 as a timestamp (which should
> effectively be no one.
> * Prepare yourself....
> Our thrift signatures are wrong, you can't overload methods in thrift
> thrift.get(byte [], byte[], ts)
> should REALLY be changed to
> GetRequest g = new GetRequest()
> g.setName()
> g.setValue()
> g.setTs() ///optional
> thrift. get( g )
> I know no one is going to want to make this change because thrift is
> quasi/dead but it would allow us to evolve thrift in a meaningful way. We
> could simple add these new methods under different names as well.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
