+1 to Jonathan's proposal.
On Tue, Mar 11, 2014 at 6:00 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: > CQL3 is almost two years old now and has proved to be the better API > that Cassandra needed. CQL drivers have caught up with and passed the > Thrift ones in terms of features, performance, and usability. CQL is > easier to learn and more productive than Thrift. > > With static columns and LWT batch support [1] landing in 2.0.6, and > UDT in 2.1 [2], I don't know of any use cases for Thrift that can't be > done in CQL. Contrawise, CQL makes many things easy that are > difficult to impossible in Thrift. New development is overwhelmingly > done using CQL. > > To date we have had an unofficial and poorly defined policy of "add > support for new features to Thrift when that is 'easy.'" However, > even relatively simple Thrift changes can create subtle complications > for the rest of the server; for instance, allowing Thrift range > tombtones would make filter conversion for CASSANDRA-6506 more > difficult. > > Thus, I think it's time to officially close the book on Thrift. We > will retain it for backwards compatibility, but we will commit to > adding no new features or changes to the Thrift API after 2.1.0. This > will help send an unambiguous message to users and eliminate any > remaining confusion from supporting two APIs. If any new use cases > come to light that can be done with Thrift but not CQL, we will commit > to supporting those in CQL. > > (To a large degree, this merely formalizes what is already de facto > reality. Most thrift clients have not even added support for > atomic_batch_mutate and cas from 2.0, and popular clients like > Astyanax are migrating to the native protocol.) > > Reasonable? > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6561 > [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5590 > > -- > Jonathan Ellis > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com > @spyced >
