Hi Maxim, Thanks for putting this together — and apologies for not raising my concern earlier in the discussion thread and causing some avoidable churn. The CEP itself is very helpful. I appreciate that it outlines how we plan to keep the new CQL commands, nodetool, and nodetool probe functionality aligned with this change. I do have a clarification: how will the new CQL API behave if the user does not specify a hostname? My understanding is that commands like nodetool bootstrap typically run on a single node. Will we continue requiring users to specify a hostname/port explicitly, or will the CQL API be responsible for orchestrating the command safely across the entire cluster or datacenter? I also share Stefan’s concern, though I don’t believe the feedback is against adding new syntax — we certainly want Cassandra to continue evolving and to make operations easier for users. This CEP moves in that direction. It might, however, be worth verifying that the proposed CQL syntax aligns with PostgreSQL conventions, and adjusting it if needed for cross-compatibility. Thanks again, Himanshu
From: Štefan Miklošovič <[email protected]> Date: Monday, October 6, 2025 at 6:28 AM To: [email protected] <[email protected]> Subject: RE: [EXTERNAL] [VOTE] CEP-38: CQL Management API CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the organization. Do not click links or open attachments unless you can confirm the sender and know the content is safe. Hi Maxim, Is your proposal truly going to introduce new CQL syntax? https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/CEP-38%3A+CQL+Management+API#CEP38:CQLManagementAPI-CQLCommandSyntax There was quite a heated argument in an adjacent thread about adding custom syntax so I just want to highlight the fact that your CEP is introducing that as well. I just want to be on the same page with everybody so we are aware that your CEP will indeed introduce new CQL syntax, as it might be considered as something which drifts away from "pure SQL" and introduces custom concepts tailored only for Cassandra. I do not personally find this problematic and I do not object what you are trying to do. I just want to make it explicit for everybody that there are various instances of this happening and we should treat these cases equal. Anyway, +1 Regards On Fri, Oct 3, 2025 at 2:11 AM Paulo Motta <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 - Nice proposal! On Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 7:45 PM Abe Ratnofsky <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 On Oct 2, 2025, at 4:56 PM, Joseph Lynch <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 On Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 10:59 AM Jaydeep Chovatia <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 On Thu, Oct 2, 2025 at 8:25 AM Doug Rohrer <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 - Thanks for the CEP and discussion... looking forward to this moving forward. Doug On Oct 2, 2025, at 9:53 AM, Bernardo Botella <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 (nb) On Oct 1, 2025, at 4:55 PM, Josh McKenzie <[email protected]<mailto:[email protected]>> wrote: +1 On Wed, Oct 1, 2025, at 7:36 PM, Francisco Guerrero wrote: +1 On 2025/10/01 17:58:53 Maxim Muzafarov wrote: > Dear Community, > > I would like to start voting on CEP-38. > > Proposal: > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/CEP-38%3A+CQL+Management+API > > Discussion thread: > https://lists.apache.org/thread/pow83q92m666nqtwyw4m3b18nnkgj2y8 > > > See voting guidelines > https://www.apache.org/foundation/voting.html > > +1 - to accept (CEP-38: CQL Management API) > 0 - don't care either way > -1 - DO NOT accept (explain why) > > > This vote will be open for at least 168 hours (7 days) till October 8, > 2025, 6 p.m. UTC. > Please, write me down the thread if you need additional time to check > the proposal or have any questions. > > -- > Maxim Muzafarov >
