To summarize all this noise I've created, the plan would be... 1.) Leave CQL WITH id intact. 2.) Deprecate and WARN on *use_deterministic_table_id *in 5.0.x. 3.) Ignore and WARN on *use_deterministic_table_id *in 5.1. 4.) Profit
On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 4:46 PM Caleb Rackliffe <calebrackli...@gmail.com> wrote: > No intention of touching WITH id in CQL > > On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 4:10 PM Caleb Rackliffe <calebrackli...@gmail.com> > wrote: > >> To clarify, my plan was to deprecate in Config/JMX and ignore it, not >> remove it entirely so it breaks existing YAMLs and JMX clients. >> >> This should be fine, if I'm reading the upgrade notes correctly, as no >> table or view creation operations will be allowed on 5.1 nodes until >> upgrade is complete and the CMS has been initialized. >> >> On Tue, Jul 30, 2024 at 3:54 PM J. D. Jordan <jeremiah.jor...@gmail.com> >> wrote: >> >>> +1 to deprecate it. What does removing it buy us? >>> >>> On Jul 30, 2024, at 3:52 PM, David Capwell <dcapw...@apple.com> wrote: >>> >>> Users can provide ids and TCM can manage to make them safe, so agree we >>> don’t really need the feature anymore. I am fine with deprecating the >>> feature, but removing would be a breaking change for anyone that had that >>> config in place, so not a fan of breaking the config interface. >>> >>> On Jul 30, 2024, at 1:38 PM, Caleb Rackliffe <calebrackli...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> I'd like to propose removing deterministic table IDs for new *user* >>> tables and views in trunk. With TCM in place, it looks like the reason we >>> added *use_deterministic_table_id*, concurrent table creations, is no >>> longer a concern. >>> >>> Thoughts? Objections? >>> >>> >>>
