Hi all, My main two concerns here are:
1) The key types used by GoraDynamoDB module. They seem "too specific"? I think maybe we could work with the QueryOptimizer approach Keith and Enis were working on, and to finally implement specific optimizations per data store. 2) GoraDynamoDB uses a non-avro based bean, but this causes that the user would have to generate different classes for each data store he would like to use. I don't think this is the proper behaviour because the user would have to create different java classes every time he wished to use a different data store? maybe we could make all data stores use Persistent objects and in that manner the java generated class may have some extra methods or annotations but could still be usable by any of the other data stores. What do you guys think? Renato M. 2013/5/3 Lewis John Mcgibbney <[email protected]>: > Hi All, > I thought I would open this thread in as a platform for people to (if they > so wish) voice what issue(s) theu are having post GORA-103 e.g. DynamoDB > integration, changes to API and introduction of webservice API? > IMHO the best, most time efficient way we can verify if we've introduced > bugs (or whatever) is to get the code tested, get it released (if entirely > possible), get people using it, and get feedback within the Gora community. > We will address this much more adequately if the discrepancies/doubts are > voiced and we can begin to think about what went wrong (if it actually > did), when, how and where. > Can anyone comment on their findings? > I posted on this list a couple of times recently my personal experiences > using Gora trunk[0] with gora-cassandra. I couldn't pin point the issues I > was having though. > > Lewis > > [0] http://www.mail-archive.com/dev%40gora.apache.org/msg02354.html > > -- > *Lewis*
