There is no reason to be angry. This is progress. This is the circle of live.
It happens anywhere at any time. Am 12.03.2017 07:34 schrieb "Dor Laor" <d...@scylladb.com>: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> >> >> On 2017-03-10 09:57 (-0800), Rakesh Kumar wrote: >> > Cassanda vs Scylla is a valid comparison because they both are >> compatible. Scylla is a drop-in replacement for Cassandra. >> >> No, they aren't, and no, it isn't >> > > Jeff is angry with us for some reason. I don't know why, it's natural that > when > a new opponent there are objections and the proof lies on us. > We go through great deal of doing it and we don't just throw comments > without backing. > > Scylla IS a drop in replacement for C*. We support the same CQL (from > version 1.7 it's cql 3.3.1, protocol v4), the same SStable format (based on > 2.1.8). In 1.7 release we support cql uploader > from 3.x. We will support the SStable format of 3.x natively in 3 month > time. Soon all of the feature set will be implemented. We always have been > using this page (not 100% up to date, we'll update it this week): > http://www.scylladb.com/technology/status/ > > We add a jmx-proxy daemon in java in order to make the transition as > smooth as possible. Almost all the nodetool commands just work, for sure > all the important ones. > Btw: we have a RESTapi and Prometheus formats, much better than the hairy > jmx one. > > Spark, Kairosdb, Presto and probably Titan (we add Thrift just for legacy > users and we don't intend > to decommission an api). > > Regarding benchmarks, if someone finds a flaw in them, we'll do the best > to fix it. > Let's ignore them and just here what our users have to say: > http://www.scylladb.com/users/ > > >
