I'm very much in favor of a warning, and I lean towards disabling them (and
MVs, while we're at it) by default as well.

I've seen both features be the death of clusters, and are a major risk for
teams that are brand new to Cassandra.

On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 11:19 AM Andrés de la Peña <a.penya.gar...@gmail.com>

> Hello all,
> It is my understanding that SASI is still to be considered an
> experimental/beta feature, and they apparently are not being very actively
> developed. Some higlighted problems in SASI are:
> - OOMs during flush, as it is described in CASSANDRA-12662
> - General secondary index consistency problems described in CASSANDRA-8272.
> There is a pending-review patch addressing the problem for regular 2i.
> However, the proposed solution is based on indexing tombstones. SASI
> doesn't index tombstones, so it wouldn't be enterely trivial to extend the
> approach to SASI.
> - Probably insufficient testing. As far as I know, we don't have a single
> dtest for SASI nor tests dealing with large SSTables.
> Similarly to what CASSANDRA-13959 did with materialized views,
> CASSANDRA-14866 aims to throw a native protocol warning about SASI
> experimental state, and to add a config property to disable them. Perhaps
> this property could be disabled by default in trunk. This should raise
> awareness about SASI maturity until we let them in a more stable state.
> The purpose for this thread is discussing whether we want to add this
> warning, the config property and, more controversially, if we want to set
> SASI as disabled by default in trunk.

Jon Haddad
twitter: rustyrazorblade

Reply via email to