On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 11:40 AM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Sun, Mar 12, 2017 at 1:38 AM, benjamin roth <brs...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> 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/ >>> >>> >>> > > Scylla is NOT a drop in replacement for Cassandra. Cassandra is a TM. > Cassandra is NOT a certification body. You are not a certification body. > > "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/ " > > No matter how "compatible" you believe Scylla is you can not assert this > claim. > > > Also there is no reason to say Jeff is 'angry' because he asserted his believe in fact. "No, they aren't, and no, it isn't" Does not sound angry. t Besides that your your own words prove it: "Scylla IS a drop in replacement for C*" "Soon all of the feature set will be implemented" Something is NOT a "drop in replacement" when it does NOT have all the features. Also knowing Jeff who is very even keel, I highly doubt because he made a short concise statement he is "angry". That being said I am little bit angry by the shameless self promotion and Jabbering on you seem to be doing. We get it you know about kernels and page faults and want to talk endlessly about it.
