Sylvain Lebresne created CASSANDRA-8063:
-------------------------------------------
Summary: Consider removing UDF-as-class functionality
Key: CASSANDRA-8063
URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8063
Project: Cassandra
Issue Type: Bug
Reporter: Sylvain Lebresne
Fix For: 3.0
We've introduce 2 ways to provide (scalar) UDFs: either by providing a
class+method name (and assuming C* can find such class and method in the
classpath), or by providing the body of the function directly in the {{CREATE
FUNCTION}} statement (with such body being able to be in either java or some
variety of scripting languages).
I submit that we remove the first option: the declaration of functions from a
class+method name. I was the first to insist on adding it, but in hindsight I
think it adds more complexity/confusion than anything else. More specifically,
I think the UDF-as-class option is always inferior to CASSANDRA-7562 because:
# it's more error prone. You have to manually deploy the class containing the
function to every C* node (and make sure it is in the classpath). It's way too
easy to end up with some node not having the function due to simple operator
error.
# it's not faster. In fact, post-CASSANDRA-7924, the UDF-as-java-source is
probably faster since it doesn't involve reflection while the UDF-as-class
option does.
Overall, I think removing the UDF-as-class will simplify things without really
losing anything (of course, we can re-evaluate this in the future if new
arguments arises, but it's easier to add than to remove).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
