As attractive as it would be to clean house, I think we owe it to our users to keep Thrift around for the forseeable future rather than orphan all Thrift-using applications (which is virtually everyone) on 1.2.
On Sat, Dec 1, 2012 at 7:33 AM, 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 >> -- Jonathan Ellis Project Chair, Apache Cassandra co-founder, http://www.datastax.com @spyced
