Just wanted to let people who follow the user list know that if there is interest in something like plugins, triggers, or coprocessors on the server-side with Cassandra, the ticket to follow or get involved with (code, comments, etc) is CASSANDRA-1311: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1311
On Feb 11, 2011, at 1:31 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote: > So from here I guess it's a matter of working out the comments/concerns > presented on 1311 and any future discussion sounds like it belongs there. > > Like I said, I just wanted to initiate discussion since it had been a while > and the dust from 0.7 had settled. It seems like an incredibly useful > concept to have as a core feature. Another motivation was Ben Black > presenting at Strata. He had mentioned that he and Cliff had worked through > doing server side operations which sounded similar (though their effort > sounded like it was not generalizable). I've talked to others in the > community that have hoped for a feature like this too. In any case, since it > crossed ticket boundaries, I thought it would be most appropriate to gauge > interest as a discussion thread. > > Hopefully this will help for people who would like to either help out with > implementation or give feedback as to how it can be made general purpose or > more Cassandra-y. > > On Feb 11, 2011, at 1:11 PM, Jeff Hodges wrote: > >> As the dude that worked on the 1016 prototype, I agree with this. >> >> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 10:53 AM, Stu Hood <stuh...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> Honestly, I think we should just mark 1016 a dupe and move forward with >>> 1311: we won't be hurting anyone's feelings, and the implementation from >>> 1016 is: 1. much, much less complete, 2. abandoned. >>> >>> >>> On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 9:23 AM, Jeremy Hanna >>> <jeremy.hanna1...@gmail.com>wrote: >>> >>>> Thanks Maxim - I'll just go ahead and BCC you and Hentschel and move the >>>> discussion to the dev list. >>>> >>>> Based on the comments on 1311 - did you have anything else to add to that - >>>> could we unify around 1016 or 1311 and work on getting that to a general >>>> state of acceptance? Were there any that were able to do some work on >>>> either these days? Or are we not at that point? >>>> >>>> On Feb 11, 2011, at 10:36 AM, Maxim Grinev wrote: >>>> >>>>> Hi all, >>>>> >>>>> Jeremy, thanks for starting the discussion! We don't follow the dev list >>>> closely so it was a good idea to email it directly. >>>>> >>>>> It really seems to be about the same. To unify the discussions, we >>>> propose to list the features of each solution and compare them feature by >>>> feature. Here is the feature list for triggers: >>>>> • Triggers are set on a column family. Triggers are executed for >>>> each mutation to the column family and parametrized by the mutation. >>>>> • The mutation, which is the trigger parameter, is the "new" value. >>>> The trigger cannot see the "old" value. >>>>> • Triggers are executed asynchronously some time after the write >>>> which fired it is acknowledged to the client. >>>>> • Triggers are executed once during normal execution. We guarantee >>>> "at least once" execution in case of node failures. >>>>> Cheers, >>>>> Maxim >>>>> >>>>> >>>>> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 8:45 AM, Jeremy Hanna >>>>> <jeremy.hanna1...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>>> Hey guys, >>>>>> >>>>>> I was just wondering if it would be a good time to unify discussions on >>>> plugins/triggers/coprocessors? >>>>>> >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1016 >>>>>> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1311 >>>>>> >>>>>> I was going to email the dev list but since I don't know if all of you >>>> follow the dev list and you guys are the ones that expressed the most >>>> interest, I thought I would start here. >>>>> >>>>> Yeah, they're all tackling basically the same problem. For which we >>>>> should have a single solution. >>>>> >>>>> -ryan >>>>> >>>> >>>> >>> >
