Thanks for explaining, Sylvain.You say that it is "not a mandatory one", how long could we expect it to be "not mandatory"?I think the new CQL stuff is great and I will probably use it heavily. I understand the upgrade path, but my question is if I should start planning for an all-CQL future, or if I still could make some CFs with thrift and also expect it to work in 3 years time. You say "you should see CQL3 non compact tables as the new stuff, the thing that you use post-upgrade" - but doesn't that mean that we also have to suddenly depend on a schema? Let us for example say you have a logger, which logs all kinds of different stuff - typically key-value - and that each row could contain different keys. ROWKEY1: key1: val1, key2: val2, key3: val3ROWKEY2: key4: val4, key1: val2, keyN: valN Is this possible without using multiple rows in CQL3 non compact tables? .vegard,
----- Original Message ----- From: user@cassandra.apache.org To:"user@cassandra.apache.org" Cc: Sent:Wed, 9 Jan 2013 23:14:25 +0100 Subject:Re: Wide rows in CQL 3 I'd be clear, CQL3 is meant as an upgrade from thrift. Not a mandatory one, you can stick to thrift if you don't think CQL3 is better. But if you do decide to upgrade, you should see CQL3 non compact tables as the new stuff, the thing that you use post-upgrade. While you upgrade, stick to compact tables. Once you've upgraded, then you can start using the new stuff and accessing the new stuff the old way doesn't matter. -- Sylvain
