Hi Tristan, I've spent the last couple weekends testing the CRUD DML stuff and its very close to meeting that objective (although NULL handling needs some tuning).
The main hiccups are in the JDBC driver which I have been working through with Rick - once he accepts my patches it'll be pretty solid in terms of cross-platform compatibility. On the DDL, I personally have a need for similar compatibility. One app I'm working on programmatically creates the schema for a rather big ETL environment. It includes a very nice abstraction that creates databases and tables to accommodate tuples as they pass through the pipeline and behaves the same regardless of which DBMS is being used as the storage engine. This is possible because it turns out there is a subset of DDL that is common to all of the DBMS platforms and it would be very useful to see that in Cassandra. ap On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 8:26 PM, Tristan Tarrant <tristan.tarr...@gmail.com>wrote: > On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 10:20 AM, Sylvain Lebresne <sylv...@datastax.com > >wrote: > > > > This is just one of a few small adjustments that can be made to the > > grammar > > > to make everyone's life easier while still maintaining the spirit of > > NOSQL. > > > > To be clear, I am *not* necessarily against making CQL3 closer to the > > ANSI-SQL > > as a convenience. But only if that doesn't compromise the language > > "integrity" > > and is justified. Adding a syntax with a well known semantic but without > > > > To me database DDL (such as the CREATE statement we are talking about) is > always going to be handled in a custom fashion by applications. > While ANSI SQL compatibility for CRUD operations is a great objective, I > don't think it really matters for DDL. > > Tristan >
