Thanks for the feedback. It seems we agree to the config property, disabled by default in trunk. Regarding the warning, we might add it at least in 3.11, since for that version the property to enable SASI is going to be present but not disabled by default. WDYT?
On Tue, 15 Jan 2019 at 11:24, Benjamin Lerer <benjamin.le...@datastax.com> wrote: > +1 on config. +1 on disabling by default > > On Tue, Jan 15, 2019 at 6:51 AM Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > +1 on config > > -0 on warning > > -0 on disabling by default > > > > > > -- > > Jeff Jirsa > > > > > > > On Jan 14, 2019, at 9:22 PM, Taylor Cressy <taylorcre...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > > > > +1 on config. +1 on disabling. > > > > > > +1 on applying it to materialized views as well. > > > > > >> On Jan 14, 2019, at 17:29, Joshua McKenzie <jmcken...@apache.org> > > wrote: > > >> > > >> +1 on config change, +1 on disabling, and so long as the comments make > > the > > >> limitations and risks extremely clear, I'm fine w/out the client > > warning. > > >> > > >> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 12:28 PM Andrés de la Peña < > > a.penya.gar...@gmail.com> > > >> wrote: > > >> > > >>> I mean disabling the creation of new SASI indices with CREATE INDEX > > >>> statement, the existing indexes would continue working. The CQL > client > > >>> warning will be thrown with that creation statement as well (if they > > are > > >>> enabled). > > >>> > > >>>> On Mon, 14 Jan 2019 at 20:18, Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>> When we say disable, do you mean disable creation of new SASI > > indices, or > > >>>> disable using existing ones? I assume it's just creation of new? > > >>>> > > >>>> On Mon, Jan 14, 2019 at 11:19 AM Andrés de la Peña < > > >>>> a.penya.gar...@gmail.com> > > >>>> wrote: > > >>>> > > >>>>> Hello all, > > >>>>> > > >>>>> It is my understanding that SASI is still to be considered an > > >>>>> experimental/beta feature, and they apparently are not being very > > >>>> actively > > >>>>> developed. Some higlighted problems in SASI are: > > >>>>> > > >>>>> - OOMs during flush, as it is described in CASSANDRA-12662 > > >>>>> - General secondary index consistency problems described in > > >>>> CASSANDRA-8272. > > >>>>> There is a pending-review patch addressing the problem for regular > > 2i. > > >>>>> However, the proposed solution is based on indexing tombstones. > SASI > > >>>>> doesn't index tombstones, so it wouldn't be enterely trivial to > > extend > > >>>> the > > >>>>> approach to SASI. > > >>>>> - Probably insufficient testing. As far as I know, we don't have a > > >>> single > > >>>>> dtest for SASI nor tests dealing with large SSTables. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> Similarly to what CASSANDRA-13959 did with materialized views, > > >>>>> CASSANDRA-14866 aims to throw a native protocol warning about SASI > > >>>>> experimental state, and to add a config property to disable them. > > >>> Perhaps > > >>>>> this property could be disabled by default in trunk. This should > > raise > > >>>>> awareness about SASI maturity until we let them in a more stable > > state. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> The purpose for this thread is discussing whether we want to add > this > > >>>>> warning, the config property and, more controversially, if we want > to > > >>> set > > >>>>> SASI as disabled by default in trunk. > > >>>>> > > >>>>> WDYT? > > >>>>> > > >>>> > > >>> > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > > > > > > --------------------------------------------------------------------- > > To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org > > For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org > > > > >
