Good idea. Lets remove thrift, CQL3 is still beta, but I am willing to upgrade to a version that removes thrift. Then when all our clients can not connect they will be forced to get with the program.
On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 5:33 PM, Jason Brown <jasedbr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi Jonathan, > > I'm in favor of paying off the technical debt, as well, and I wonder if > there is value in removing support for thrift with 2.0? We're currently in > 'do as little as possible' mode with thrift, so should we aggressively cast > it off and push the binary CQL protocol? Seems like a jump to '2.0', along > with the other initiatives, would be a reasonable time/milestone to do so. > > Thanks, > > -Jason > > > On Fri, Nov 30, 2012 at 12:12 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > > The more I think about it, the more I think we should call 1.2-next, > > 2.0. I'd like to spend some time paying off our technical debt: > > > > - replace supercolumns with composites (CASSANDRA-3237) > > - rewrite counters (CASSANDRA-4775) > > - improve storage engine support for wide rows > > - better stage management to improve latency (disruptor? lightweight > > threads? custom executor + queue?) > > - improved repair (CASSANDRA-3362, 2699) > > > > Of course, we're planning some new features as well: > > - triggers (CASSANDRA-1311) > > - improved query fault tolerance (CASSANDRA-4705) > > - row size limits (CASSANDRA-3929) > > - cql3 integration for hadoop (CASSANDRA-4421) > > - improved caching (CASSANDRA-1956, 2864) > > > > -- > > Jonathan Ellis > > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra > > co-founder, http://www.datastax.com > > @spyced > > >
