No - it took me a little while to see what is going on with datastax, I wasn't interested in datastax/DSE. I was interested in Cassandra.
I see the value of datastax supporting Cassandra, I think it's a lot further along than it would have been without their support. But they've also vacuumed up all the knowledge and talent and 'sell' it. They have a good business model and I don't have anything against them, but I do think that a lot of the knowledge and detail is locked up in their docs. I don't think its particularly well managed - in particular most of the important stuff being in blog format - you need to interpret the timeframes and a lot more to really figure out what current best practice is and feature sets available to you are. Otherwise you're digging through documentation of enterprise software trying to figure out which bits apply to you. A few examples: There has been a bit of chatter about counter columns not being right, maybe unstable, but they'll be much better in 2.1 flavours. However they're 50% of the reason I went with C* at the time, and everything I was reading was sending me in that direction. The information I was reading was only correct at a point in time. The other 50% was dynamic columns, but there was (and still is I think) a lot of confusion around CQL3 and thrift style wide rows. All of the confusion is around the nonclamenture and the point in time the docs you happen to be reading were written. Something as integral as partition and cluster keys requires interpretation to understand - that doesn't seem right. Anyway, I will check out the training, its been a while since I've been learning - mostly doing lately. On Thursday, July 24, 2014, Jack Krupansky <j...@basetechnology.com> wrote: > Out of curiosity, did you look at or utilize DataStax’s free online > training? > > See: > > http://www.datastax.com/what-we-offer/products-services/training/virtual-training > > Any feedback? Any suggestions as to what needs it does or doesn’t fulfill? > > -- Jack Krupansky > > *From:* Nicholas Okunew > *Sent:* Wednesday, July 23, 2014 8:29 AM > *To:* user@cassandra.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Why is the cassandra documentation such poor quality? > > I think the problem is a little deeper than that. I've been working with > cassandra for about 7 months now - it was very challenging to find out any > real information about using cassandra, and even harder to get clear > information on operating it. There's a truckload of reading you have to do, > and no one place you can find it. > > Searching google largely turns up datastax blog posts and DSE docs, almost > all of it out of date (not to say the docs aren't up to date, but the > search results often result in old docs, and old blog posts). > > Deeper searching usually results in a link to JIRA. No offense to anyone > involved, but when your first experience of trying to learn an open source > tool is the realisation that all the information you need is simply spread > across ~7000 jira tickets, it doesn't make the knowledge feel very > accessible. > > As an example, finding a java driver with a useful abstraction was > non-trivial - it appeared on the surface that there wasn't really one, that > you had to write everything yourself on top of CQL. Now I (as everyone else > on this list knows) that datastax provide one. At the time I never found a > simple page that just pointed me in the direction, and showed a basic usage > example. > > Another example is that there is constant confusion about nonclamenture on > this list, because naming has changed over time. If you don't know you're > reading old information, or what the significant changes are between > 0.whatever, 1.whatever and 2.whatever its very hard to know whether you're > even googling for the right thing. Dynamic columns are a great example of > this. I think the fact that it keeps coming up on this list is a strong > indicator that the information is not available in a 'sufficient' way. > > Another way of putting it is, when I started trying to learn about > cassandra, pretty much every piece of consumable information I was able to > find was out of date, but it wasn't always obvious that this was the case. > > Having said all that, everything I've seen on this list points to prompt, > useful and friendly assistance, even for questions that are frequently > asked. I have no stake either way in what the rules on who can contribute > are, but I can definitely say I would have very much enjoyed a much softer > landing when trying to learn cassandra, from the basics all the way through > to the detail of ops. > > > > > On 23 July 2014 21:55, Jason Wee <peich...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> I agree to the people here already sharing their ways to access >> documentation. If you are starter, you should better spend time to search >> for documentation (like using google) or hours to read. Then start ask >> specific question. Coming here kpkb about poor quality of documentation >> just does not cut it. >> >> If you find documentation is outdated, you can email to the people in >> charge and tell them what is wrong and what you think will improve. There >> are some documentation which is left there so that we can read and >> understand history where it came from and some may still use old version of >> cassandra. >> >> >> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 7:49 PM, Jack Krupansky <j...@basetechnology.com> >> wrote: >> >>> And the simplest and easiest thing to do is simply email this list >>> when you see something wrong or missing in the DataStax Cassandra doc, or >>> for anything that is not adequately anywhere. I work with the doc people >>> there, so I can make sure they see corrections and improvements. And simply >>> sharing knowledge on this list is always a big step forward. >>> >>> -- Jack Krupansky >>> >>> *From:* spa...@gmail.com >>> *Sent:* Wednesday, July 23, 2014 4:25 AM >>> *To:* user@cassandra.apache.org >>> *Subject:* Re: Why is the cassandra documentation such poor quality? >>> >>> I would like to help out with the documentation of C*. How do I start? >>> >>> >>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 12:46 PM, Robert Stupp <sn...@snazy.de> wrote: >>> >>>> Just a note: >>>> If you have suggestions how to improve documentation on the datastax >>>> website, write them an email to d...@datastax.com. They appreciate >>>> proposals :) >>>> >>>> Am 23.07.2014 um 09:10 schrieb Mark Reddy <mark.re...@boxever.com>: >>>> >>>> Hi Kevin, >>>> >>>> The difference here is that the Apache Cassandra site is maintained by >>>> the community whereas the DataStax site is maintained by paid employees >>>> with a vested interest in producing documentation. >>>> >>>> With DataStax having some comprehensive docs, I guess the desire for >>>> people to maintain the Apache site has dwindled. However, if you are >>>> interested in contributing to it and bringing it back up to standard you >>>> can, thus is the freedom of open source. >>>> >>>> >>>> Mark >>>> >>>> >>>> On Wed, Jul 23, 2014 at 2:54 AM, Kevin Burton <bur...@spinn3r.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> This document: >>>>> >>>>> https://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/Operations >>>>> >>>>> … for example. Is extremely out dated… does NOT reflect 2.x releases >>>>> certainly. Mentions commands that are long since removed/deprecated. >>>>> >>>>> Instead of giving bad documentation, maybe remove this and mark it as >>>>> obsolete. >>>>> >>>>> The datastax documentation… is … acceptable I guess. My main >>>>> criticism there is that a lot of it it is in their blog. >>>>> >>>>> Kevin >>>>> >>>>> -- >>>>> >>>>> Founder/CEO Spinn3r.com <http://spinn3r.com/> >>>>> Location: *San Francisco, CA* >>>>> blog: http://burtonator.wordpress.com >>>>> … or check out my Google+ profile >>>>> <https://plus.google.com/102718274791889610666/posts> >>>>> <http://spinn3r.com/> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> http://spawgi.wordpress.com >>> We can do it and do it better. >>> >> >> > >
