Most of the work to provide this feature is already done. We need to
generate server side CQL for snapshots already. All we need to do is
expose it via either a "DESCRIBE" CQL command, or I'm equally happy to see
it land in a virtual table.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 2:45 PM sankalp kohli wrote:
>
+1 on holding off and focus on shipping 4.0
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 12:25 PM Joshua McKenzie
wrote:
> This looks like a feature that'd potentially invalidate some testing that's
> been done and we've been feature frozen for over a year and a half. Also:
> scope creep.
>
> My PoV is we hold off. I
This looks like a feature that'd potentially invalidate some testing that's
been done and we've been feature frozen for over a year and a half. Also:
scope creep.
My PoV is we hold off. If we get into a cadence of more frequent releases
we'll have it soon enough.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 3:03 PM w
Hi,
Normally I ping the person on the ticket or in Slack to ask him/her for status
update and whether I can help. Then probably he/she gives me a direction.
If I can’t find the person anymore, I just use my best judgement and coordinate
with people who might know better than me.
For now this str
That's totally fair - but this brings us back to needing a discussion and
plan on prioritization for what 4.next looks like.
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 7:41 AM Brandon Williams wrote:
> I want to start by saying I don't disagree with you on this issue.
>
> But, I do want to highlight that feature cr
+1. My preference is to have `DESCRIBE` CQL statement.
Dinesh
> On Apr 1, 2020, at 11:33 AM, Nate McCall wrote:
>
> I think part of being a modern database is not relying on drivers/clients
> to idiomatically rebuild the schema.
>
> Thanks for bringing it up, Jon - huge +1 on merging (some for
I want to start by saying I don't disagree with you on this issue.
But, I do want to highlight that feature creep is real, and hurting
our impending release.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 1:33 PM Nate McCall wrote:
>
> I think part of being a modern database is not relying on drivers/clients
> to idio
I think we should get serious about the so-called freeze.
On Wed, Apr 1, 2020 at 1:27 PM Jon Haddad wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> I was looking through our open JIRAs and realized we hadn't merged in
> server side describe calls yet. The ticket died off a ways ago, and I
> pinged Chris about it yeste
I think part of being a modern database is not relying on drivers/clients
to idiomatically rebuild the schema.
Thanks for bringing it up, Jon - huge +1 on merging (some form) of this.
On Thu, Apr 2, 2020 at 7:27 AM Jon Haddad wrote:
> Hey folks,
>
> I was looking through our open JIRAs and real
Hey folks,
I was looking through our open JIRAs and realized we hadn't merged in
server side describe calls yet. The ticket died off a ways ago, and I
pinged Chris about it yesterday. He's got a lot of his plate and won't be
able to work on it anytime soon. I still think we should include this
My PoV re: perf: if it's a regression or something that makes a new
feature just Not Work, mark it as bug.
All else mark improvement and can go in in patch rel.
On Tue, Mar 31, 2020 at 9:17 PM Jake Luciani wrote:
>
> I see what you mean, I guess my personal line is: does this work worse than
> t
11 matches
Mail list logo
