With no objections I have renamed 1.3 to 2.0 in JIRA.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 2:12 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> The more I think about it, the more I think we should call 1.2-next,
> 2.0. I'd like to spend some time paying off our technical debt:
>
> - replace supercolumns with composites (CASSAN
Oops, meant to address this specifically to Jonathan, but since I've
confused 'reply' with 'forward'. my apologies for any extra noise on this
topic.
On Mon, Dec 3, 2012 at 9:25 AM, Jason Brown wrote:
> - world
>
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> This topic may have been discussed elsewhere, or my memory is w
- world
Hi Jonathan,
This topic may have been discussed elsewhere, or my memory is worse off
than I thought, but what is our long term vision for thrift support?
Admittedly, I need to learn much more about the binary CQL protocol, and I
understand Ed's concerns, as well (more acutely now) about e
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 12:24 PM, Edward Capriolo wrote:
> I do not understand why everyone wants to force this issue on removing
> thrift.
I'm -1 on removing thrift, and by my count, that would put us at -3
binding if it ever came to vote, so let's consider this proposition
closed and move on to
I agree with Edward here. We use Thrift too and we haven't really found a good
enough reason to move to CQL3.
-- Drew
On Dec 1, 2012, at 10:24 AM, Edward Capriolo wrote:
> I do not understand why everyone wants to force this issue on removing
> thrift. If cql, cql sparse tables and the new tra
I do not understand why everyone wants to force this issue on removing
thrift. If cql, cql sparse tables and the new transport are better people
will naturally begin to use them, but as it stands now I see the it
this way:
Thrift still has more clients for more languages, thrift has more higher
le
I agree on 2.0.
For the thrift part, we've said clearly that we wouldn't remove it any time
soon so let's stick to that. Besides, I would agree it's too soon anyway.
What we can do however in the relatively short term on that front, is to
pull thrift in it's own jar (we've almost removed all inter
I agree, I don't think its a great idea to drop thrift until the back
end tools are 100% compatible and have some level of agreement from the major
users of
Cassandra.
Paying off technical dept though I'm all for, and I think its key to the
long term success of the application. Right now Superco
I'm not thrilled with Thrift, but I'd like to see and hear more real
world use of CQL first (Avro all the things is not that long ago).
That said, a major rev /could/ do this - not start the thrift server by
default. It's then a hoop jump to enable it via nodetool/yaml, and
signals to the cli
+1
Regards,
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> The more I think about it, the more I think we should call 1.2-next,
> 2.0. I'd like to spend some time paying off our technical debt:
>
> - replace supercolumns with composites (CASSANDRA-3237)
> - rewrite counters (CASS
My hope is that after 1.2 (i.e. by the time we're 2.0'ing), the binary CQL
protocol is out of beta :).
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 2:39 PM, Edward Capriolo wrote:
> Good idea. Lets remove thrift, CQL3 is still beta, but I am willing to
> upgrade to a version that removes thrift. Then when all our cli
As attractive as it would be to clean house, I think we owe it to our
users to keep Thrift around for the forseeable future rather than
orphan all Thrift-using applications (which is virtually everyone) on
1.2.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:33 AM, Jason Brown wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> I'm in favor of
Good idea. Lets remove thrift, CQL3 is still beta, but I am willing to
upgrade to a version that removes thrift. Then when all our clients can not
connect they will be forced to get with the program.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Jason Brown wrote:
> Hi Jonathan,
>
> I'm in favor of paying of
Hi Jonathan,
I'm in favor of paying off the technical debt, as well, and I wonder if
there is value in removing support for thrift with 2.0? We're currently in
'do as little as possible' mode with thrift, so should we aggressively cast
it off and push the binary CQL protocol? Seems like a jump to
14 matches
Mail list logo
