wouldn't that go against what DataStax has publicly stated about support for Thrift?
So far, DataStax has been good about keeping the Thrift API up to date. I'm inclined to trust DataStax mean what they say. If DataStax doesn't have the man power to keep Thrift up to speed with new features, I'm willing to pitch in and I'm guessing so would others. On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:52 PM, Dave Brosius <[email protected]>wrote: > Realize that there will be more and more new features that come along as > cassandra matures. It is an overwhelming certainty that these feature will > be available thru the new native interface & CQL. The same level of > certainty can't be given to Thrift. Certainly if you have existing > applications running against Thrift, then there is no need to worry that > Thrift will break or not perform optimally in the future. But going > forward, there will be things that you won't be able to use thru Thrift > that may solve problems for you. If you are starting now, the > recommendation is to use the new native interface and CQL. > > Just saying... > > > > > *----- Original Message -----* > *From:* "Peter Lin" <[email protected]> > *Sent:* Tue, December 1 7, 2013 16:28 > *Subject:* Re: Why was Thrift defined obsolete? > > > For me, it's best to now both and use both where each is strong. that way > you get the most out of cassandra. > > I am bias in favor of thrift, since I've been contributing to hector and > ported hector to C# over the summer. > > > On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 4:20 PM, Edward Capriolo <[email protected]>wrote: > >> Also you are going to encounter code that uses thirft/hector >> thrift/asyanax and if you work on a codebase that was designed before CQL >> you still need to support it. Th ere are some concepts people have employed >> in those tools like VirtualKeyspaces etc that have not made their way into >> CQL. >> >> >> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 9:00 AM, Peter Lin <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> >>> That's just mis-information by people that don't understand thrift. >>> The thrift drivers are still much more mature than the java drivers >>> right now. DataStax has stated on multiple occasions thrift isn't going any >>> where. CQL is fine if people only want to use SQL-like language. Search the >>> cassandra mailing list and you'll see this topic comes up regularly. >>> My bias perspective is "use thrift" to use 100% of the features that >>> Cassandra provides, or use pure CQL and limit yourself to 90%. >>> >>> The main downside of using pure CQL (ie no thrift) is that once you've >>> defined a default type for column values, you can't stick arbitrary data >>> into dynamic columns. Cassandra will tell you when you try to insert a Date >>> when the default value type is int. Basically, it will throw an exception. >>> In contrast, if you use thrift, you can insert what ever type you want and >>> have total control over what goes into dynamic columns. >>> For me, the biggest value of dynamic columns + data types is that I can >>> insert what ever I want into dynamic columns and still have the safety net >>> of knowing the type. A lot of people are afraid of thrift and don't want to >>> dive deep, which is fine. I prefer to understand things at a deep level, >>> and use a tool to the fullest extent. >>> >>> peter >>> >>> >>> On Tue, Dec 17, 2013 at 8:40 AM, Daneel Yaitskov < >>> [email protected]> wrote: >>> >>>> Hi, >>>> >>>> I've read some articles about Cassandra and I noticed an opinion that >>>> Thrift protocol >>>> has some flaws. Thrift should go away in the nearest futures. >>>> >>>> But I cannot find any reference answering the question why is it so bad? >>>> >>>> >>>> -- >>>> Daneel S. Yaitskov >>>> >>>
