Hello! Please do not overestimate the extent in which we rely on H2 in Apache Ignite. We mostly use it for query parsing/planning while the rest is done by our own code/
1) I think that the usage of MERGE is not recommended, since it is not providing additional guarantees from SELECT and then INSERT/UPDATE. I don't think we're going to change the MERGE syntax that we have currently. I didn't even know that there's something wrong with it. 2) I've not heard of having an entirely new type of SYS schema. I think SYS is here to stay for the meantime. 3) Absolutely makes sense, Apache Ignite 3.0 is in a very early stage where only a handful of features are being prototyped. 2.x will remain being the workhorse in the observable future in my opinion. Regards, -- Ilya Kasnacheev пн, 25 янв. 2021 г. в 11:50, Lukas Eder <[email protected]>: > Hello folks, > > I'm currently working on the jOOQ integration for Apache Ignite's SQL > language support. I was invited by Denis Magda to post my questions here, > see: > https://twitter.com/denismagda/status/1352316238806958080 > > From what I understand, you're going to use calcite to parse and run your > SQL queries. My questions evolve only around syntax, not optimisation. > > While H2 (which you're currently using in some way) has become quite > standards compliant over the past years, I still think that there will be > substantial differences in syntax. With the syntax not being documented > very well, I wonder what differences one may expect? Will 3.0 be akin to a > complete rewrite of the SQL support also for users, or will you try to stay > backwards compatible to some extent? > > In particular: > > - You're currently supporting H2's rather esoteric MERGE statement, which > even H2 have deprecated themselves in favour of the standard SQL MERGE > statement. I'm assuming you'll follow suit? > - Will the SYS schema be maintained as it is, or will there be an entirely > new type of SYS schema (this is relevant to me to reverse engineer schema > meta data). > - For how long will the 2.x branch be maintained once 3.0 ships? Does it > even make sense to start supporting Ignite 2.x at this point? > > Cheers, > Lukas >
