lujiajing1126 commented on pull request #2:
URL: https://github.com/apache/skywalking-banyandb/pull/2#issuecomment-846868529
> @hanahmily @lujiajing1126 As you are doing the official query API rather
than just testing, I prefer to consider the schema concept. From my
understanding, the query API should not care which fields OAP is going to use
for the query. It should care more about which fields have an index, or which
kind of the index is better in the storage model.
>
> The protocol level data type should more like
`type=SEARCHABLE_ID`(represents trace id or segment id), or
`type=TIMESTAMP`(represents start_time), etc.
>
> We are designing BanyanDB closing to the APM field, but not for replacing
OAP logic. We just leverage the benefit of data_model and private types. What
do you think?
I am trying to understand your idea. Are you arguing that the Query module
should only rely on the general schema instead of the specific model like
Trace, Metrics and Log.
For example, query module should accept query as a format of logical
expresses, `select("traceID")`, `projection(Gt(duration, 30ms))`, and return a
general `RecordBatch` data structure containing schema of the record and data
in bytes.
--
This is an automated message from the Apache Git Service.
To respond to the message, please log on to GitHub and use the
URL above to go to the specific comment.
For queries about this service, please contact Infrastructure at:
[email protected]
