If you are using thrift there probably isn't a reason to upgrade to 2.1 What? Upgrading gets you performance regardless of your api.
We have already gone from "no new feature" talk to "less enphisis on testing". How comforting. On Tuesday, March 11, 2014, Dave Brosius <dbros...@mebigfatguy.com> wrote: > > +1, > > altho supporting thrift in 2.1 seems overly conservative. > > If you are using thrift there probably isn't a reason to upgrade to 2.1, in fact doing so will become an increasingly dumb idea as lesser and lesser emphasis will be placed on testing with 2.1+. This would allow us to greatly simplify the code footprint in 2.1 > > > > > On 03/11/2014 01:00 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: >> >> CQL3 is almost two years old now and has proved to be the better API >> that Cassandra needed. CQL drivers have caught up with and passed the >> Thrift ones in terms of features, performance, and usability. CQL is >> easier to learn and more productive than Thrift. >> >> With static columns and LWT batch support [1] landing in 2.0.6, and >> UDT in 2.1 [2], I don't know of any use cases for Thrift that can't be >> done in CQL. Contrawise, CQL makes many things easy that are >> difficult to impossible in Thrift. New development is overwhelmingly >> done using CQL. >> >> To date we have had an unofficial and poorly defined policy of "add >> support for new features to Thrift when that is 'easy.'" However, >> even relatively simple Thrift changes can create subtle complications >> for the rest of the server; for instance, allowing Thrift range >> tombtones would make filter conversion for CASSANDRA-6506 more >> difficult. >> >> Thus, I think it's time to officially close the book on Thrift. We >> will retain it for backwards compatibility, but we will commit to >> adding no new features or changes to the Thrift API after 2.1.0. This >> will help send an unambiguous message to users and eliminate any >> remaining confusion from supporting two APIs. If any new use cases >> come to light that can be done with Thrift but not CQL, we will commit >> to supporting those in CQL. >> >> (To a large degree, this merely formalizes what is already de facto >> reality. Most thrift clients have not even added support for >> atomic_batch_mutate and cas from 2.0, and popular clients like >> Astyanax are migrating to the native protocol.) >> >> Reasonable? >> >> [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6561 >> [2] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5590 >> > > -- Sorry this was sent from mobile. Will do less grammar and spell check than usual.
