Sylvain Lebresne created CASSANDRA-7791:
-------------------------------------------
Summary: Consider re-allowing to refer to UDT outside of their
keyspace
Key: CASSANDRA-7791
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7791
Project: Cassandra
Issue Type: Improvement
Reporter: Sylvain Lebresne
Fix For: 3.0
In CASSANDRA-6643 we decided to make UDT inaccessible outside of their keyspace
of definition. Doing so mainly has the advantage that when we drop a keyspace,
we don't have to worry its UDT being used in another keyspace. However, this
directly conflict with functions (UDF) being global: we can't have functions
working on UDT if functions are global and we don't allow UDT access outside
their keyspace. Which, I believe, leave us with the following possible options:
# we make UDT accessible anywhere (though their fully qualified name).
# we don't support functions on UDT at all.
# we make functions keyspace-scoped, either always, or only if they apply to
UDT.
# we revert CASSANDRA-6438 and make UDT global.
In a perfect world I would lean towards 4: the arguments to make UDT
keyspace-scoped where not wrong per-se but weak in hindsight given the other
options here. It is however basically too late: changing it would be a breaking
change so we can't reasonably change this post-2.1.0, and while it's not
released yet, it's not a change we can make without substantially delaying the
final.
Option 2 feels rather lame in my book.
Option 3 feels pretty messy. Having 2 types of UDF, some keyspace-scoped and
some that are not would be super confusing. Saying that ll UDF are
keyspace-scoped feels limiting, and we would still be somewhat inconsistent
with our existing hard-coded functions that are global.
Which leaves option 1 which might be the most pragmatic. Having to check that
UDTs are not used before allowing keyspace drop don't sound like a huge deal to
me.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
