I don't think Jeff comes across as angry. He's simply pointing out that ScyllaDB isn't a drop in replacement for Cassandra. Saying that it is is very misleading. The marketing material should really say something like "drop in replacement for some workloads" or "aims to be a drop in replacement". As is, it doesn't support everything, so it's not a drop in.
On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 10:34 PM Dor Laor <d...@scylladb.com> wrote: > On Sat, Mar 11, 2017 at 10:02 PM, Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > On 2017-03-10 09:57 (-0800), Rakesh Kumar wrote: > > Cassanda vs Scylla is a valid comparison because they both are > compatible. Scylla is a drop-in replacement for Cassandra. > > No, they aren't, and no, it isn't > > > Jeff is angry with us for some reason. I don't know why, it's natural that > when > a new opponent there are objections and the proof lies on us. > We go through great deal of doing it and we don't just throw comments > without backing. > > Scylla IS a drop in replacement for C*. We support the same CQL (from > version 1.7 it's cql 3.3.1, protocol v4), the same SStable format (based on > 2.1.8). In 1.7 release we support cql uploader > from 3.x. We will support the SStable format of 3.x natively in 3 month > time. Soon all of the feature set will be implemented. We always have been > using this page (not 100% up to date, we'll update it this week): > http://www.scylladb.com/technology/status/ > > We add a jmx-proxy daemon in java in order to make the transition as > smooth as possible. Almost all the nodetool commands just work, for sure > all the important ones. > Btw: we have a RESTapi and Prometheus formats, much better than the hairy > jmx one. > > Spark, Kairosdb, Presto and probably Titan (we add Thrift just for legacy > users and we don't intend > to decommission an api). > > Regarding benchmarks, if someone finds a flaw in them, we'll do the best > to fix it. > Let's ignore them and just here what our users have to say: > http://www.scylladb.com/users/ > > >
