To add to what Josh mentioned, the biggest hurdle was getting Phoenix+Calcite to function *exactly* the same as current Phoenix. Without this, it would be difficult to get users to migrate and it was clear we didn't have the bandwidth to maintain two different code bases. If Phoenix was being started from scratch, I'd definitely advocate that it be build it on top of Calcite.
On Thu, Aug 22, 2019 at 8:18 AM Josh Elser <els...@apache.org> wrote: > No, the effort has effectively stalled. > > It was a significant undertaking to get to where the Calcite integration > was left, but, more importantly, required significantly more efforts to > complete it than were available. > > I would assume that there is more that what exists today would still be > generally applicable, but would require efforts to rebase. > > On 8/20/19 6:44 AM, Павлухин Иван wrote: > > Hi Phoenix developers, > > > > It would be really great if you can shed a light on a current state of > > Calcite integration in Phoenix. > > > > Currently we are considering Calcite for a new SQL engine in Apache > > Ignite. And I feel that Phoenix experience might be extremely > > relevant. I found that a great effort was put on Calcite integration > > by Phoenix developers, I found a JIRA issue [1] and a related git > > branch. But as I understood it was not integrated into master branch. > > So, the questions: > > 1. Is there an active development of Calcite integration? Otherwise > > why was it stopped? > > 2. Are there any blockers for integrating Calcite? Or any significant > > downsides? (From the first glance Calcite looks as the best library > > for implementing SQL in a system written in Java). > > > > Thank you in advance! > > > > [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-1488 > > >
