On Tue, Jan 11, 2011 at 8:29 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
> I've said it elsewhere, but the only reason to fuss about a 1.0, is that
> it is loaded with special meaning. To impart some vague notion of
> readiness on people who should be paying less attention to a number, and
> doing more due diligence.
Can I vote with a "+100" ? :)
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 12:42 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 07:55 -0300, Germán Kondolf wrote:
>> Will CQL be included in the 1.0 release?
>
> CQL 1.0 will be the next release. :)
>
> --
> Eric Evans
> eev...@rackspace.com
>
>
--
//GK
http://twitt
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 07:55 -0300, Germán Kondolf wrote:
> Will CQL be included in the 1.0 release?
CQL 1.0 will be the next release. :)
--
Eric Evans
eev...@rackspace.com
Hello,
I am reading through getRangeSlice() in StorageProxy, and I am trying to
do roughly the same thing for a join operation I am trying to implement in
Cassandra.
I see that getRangeSlice() loops through all available ranges, and for
each range, it sends a request to the applicable nodes and t
Will CQL be included in the 1.0 release?
// Germán Kondolf
http://twitter.com/germanklf
http://code.google.com/p/seide/
On 12/01/2011, at 01:29, Eric Evans wrote:
> On Tue, 2011-01-11 at 19:35 -0600, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
>> Way back in Nov 09, we did a users survey and asked what features
>> p
