http://www.edwardcapriolo.com/roller/edwardcapriolo/entry/schema_vs_schema_less
Does your the tool handle the fact that foreign keys do not work? Or for that matter, how are your dealing with the fact that a "primary key" in cassandra is nothing like a "primary key" in a RDBMS? Generally under the impression that CRUD tools that auto-generate CQL schema's can give someone the rope to hang themselves. On Tue, Mar 5, 2013 at 3:46 PM, Andrew Prendergast <a...@andrewprendergast.com > wrote: > 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 > > >
