Let's discuss how to move AQL+ to SQL++ after Taewoo comes back. On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 12:10 PM, Taewoo Kim <wangs...@gmail.com> wrote:
> For similarity join, we use AQL+ that is based on AQL. I think deprecating > (not removing) AQL is OK. Ultimately, AQL+ should be converted to SQL++ :-) > > Best, > Taewoo > > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 9:04 PM, Steven Jacobs <sjaco...@ucr.edu> wrote: > > > I’ll give the BADest +1 I can :) > > Steven > > > > On Thu, Sep 7, 2017 at 8:50 PM Gerald Sangudi <sang...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > > :-) > > > > > > On Sep 7, 2017 11:44 AM, "Michael Carey" <mjca...@ics.uci.edu> wrote: > > > > > > As AsterixDB evolves, and additional features are added - e.g., > DISTINCT > > > aggregate support, or properly implemented query-bodied functions, > > > supporting two query languages is hugely expensive: Updating two > > grammars, > > > parsers, rules, tests, ... IMO it is time to let go of AQL as an > > externally > > > supported interface to AsterixDB and only have SQL++ going forward. I > > > think "everyone" has migrated - and if not we should force that > > migration. > > > (Cloudberry is on SQL++ nowadays, BAD is on SQL++ nowadays, ...) Any > > > objections? If not, I think we should make this decision officially > and > > > stop putting energy into carrying the AQL legacy around with us. > > Thoughts? > > > > > >
