On Fri, Oct 31, 2025 at 5:00 PM Patrick McFadin <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Jeff and Dinesh jumped into Phase 2, which is really the fun and > interesting part. To be clear, I am not proposing we make any changes pre > Cassandra 6 in this case. And this will be a CEP or two or three. > I was not intentionally trying to jump to Phase 2. I was trying to sus out the shape of what you were saying. I would like to think in terms of the user requirements to fully understand your proposal. IMO, SQL is a dialect that Cassandra can adopt and requires the right building blocks at the storage layer to work well. CQL should continue living alongside SQL and honestly we should not try to convert between those two unless there is a clear, well articulated reason for doing it. To be clear, I am not saying there is one. I am only keeping the door open for a constructive discussion around it if you or anybody else has one. IMO, the user should pick a lane - CQL or SQL - when they create their Keyspace. This simplifies the implementation and descopes any potential conversion or compatibility related engineering effort. Thanks, Dinesh
