[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6745?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13918057#comment-13918057
]
Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-6745:
---------------------------------------------
Hum, I kind of like my version more :). Basically, my goal is to make things as
future proof as possible since it's not at all unlikely that in the future we
might add per-table setting for both cache. So my idea was to have a simple
on/off option switch for each cache (and I kind of like for that to be a
boolean) + any number of options that control the behavior. Typically, having
rows_per_partition being the option that control whether the row cache is
enabled or not feels weird to me, feeling that we're trying to cram too much
info in that option. But I don't know, maybe it's just me trying to justify
what is ultimately a personal preference?
Other than that, I do would rather not change the thrift interface. We
definitively can't change an existing option like caching like that as this
would break clients which we don't do for thrift, and while we could probably
deprecate 'caching' to replace it with some 'caching_options', this would still
be borderline in term of backward compatibility, so I propose to leave things
as they are. In fact, I would even argue that this whole issue is kind of
breaking if done for thrift and so we may want to stick to CQL only here.
> Require specifying rows_per_partition_to_cache
> ----------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-6745
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6745
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
> Assignee: Marcus Eriksson
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 2.1 beta2
>
>
> We should require specifying rows_to_cache_per_partition for new tables or
> newly ALTERed when row caching is enabled.
> Pre-upgrade should be grandfathered in as ALL to match existing semantics.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
