Ivan, Thank you for reminding me about the dynamic schema. I've updated the IEP draft with more details on the approach, hopefully now it's more clear. I think we will be able to take the best from both fixed-schema and schemaless approaches.
вт, 1 сент. 2020 г. в 14:31, Ivan Pavlukhin <vololo...@gmail.com>: > Hi Val, > > Thank you for raising a discussion about this significant proposal! > The subject looks very significant and can greatly affect product > spirit and user experience. > > While I generally think that schema-first is a good idea, I would love > to see a thorough approaches comparison section. As we know different > databases treat data schema differently. And each way has benefits and > drawbacks. Additionally to schemeless and schema-first approaches I > remember talks about "dynamic schema". I believe that we should > describe clearly why do we prefer one approach over others. > > 2020-09-01 3:11 GMT+03:00, Valentin Kulichenko < > valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com>: > > Hi Denis, > > > > Generally speaking, I believe that the schema-first approach natively > > addresses the issue if duplicate fields in key and value objects, because > > schema will be created for a cache, not for an object, as it happens now. > > Basically, the schema will define whether there is a primary key or not, > > and which fields are included in case there is one. Any API that we would > > have must be compliant with this, so it becomes fairly easy to work with > > data as with a set of records, rather than key-value pairs. > > > > However, could you please elaborate on the relation between Ignite and > ORM? > > Is there a use case for Hibernate running on top of Ignite (I haven't > seen > > one so far)? If so, what is missing exactly on the Ignite side to support > > this? In my understanding, all you need is SQL API which we already have. > > Am I missing something? > > > > -Val > > > > On Mon, Aug 31, 2020 at 2:08 PM Denis Magda <dma...@apache.org> wrote: > > > >> Val, > >> > >> I would propose adding another point to the motivations list which is > >> related to the ORM frameworks such as Spring Data, Hibernate, Micronaut > >> and > >> many others. > >> > >> Presently, the storage engine requires to distinguish key objects from > >> the > >> value ones that complicate the usage of Ignite with those ORM frameworks > >> (especially if a key object comprises several fields). More on this can > >> be > >> found here: > >> > >> > http://apache-ignite-developers.2346864.n4.nabble.com/DISCUSSION-Key-and-Value-fields-with-same-name-and-SQL-DML-td47557.html > >> > >> It will be nice if the new schema-first approach allows us to work with > a > >> single entity object when it comes to the ORMs. With no need to split > the > >> entity into a key and value. Just want to be sure that the Ignite 3.0 > has > >> all the essential public APIs that would support the single-entity based > >> approach. > >> > >> What do you think? > >> > >> - > >> Denis > >> > >> > >> On Fri, Aug 28, 2020 at 3:50 PM Valentin Kulichenko < > >> valentin.kuliche...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> > >> > Igniters, > >> > > >> > One of the big changes proposed for Ignite 3.0 is the so-called > >> > "schema-first approach". To add more clarity, I've started writing the > >> IEP > >> > for this change: > >> > > >> > > >> > https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/IGNITE/IEP-54%3A+Schema-first+Approach > >> > > >> > Please take a look and let me know if there are any immediate > thoughts, > >> > suggestions, or objections. > >> > > >> > -Val > >> > > >> > > > > > -- > > Best regards, > Ivan Pavlukhin >
