Hi Ed,
totally get the reasoning behind NOSQL and that it'll never be 100%
ANSI-SQL.. this is more about making the core functionality you do have
compatible with existing clients, otherwise why bother implementing a JDBC
+ SQL interface?
Cassandra is more than capable of accommodating say a VARC
If the syntax effectively does nothing I do not see the point of adding it.
CQL is never going to be 100% compatible ANSI-SQL dialect.
On Sat, Mar 2, 2013 at 12:19 PM, Michael Kjellman
wrote:
> Might want to create a Jira ticket at issues.apache.org instead of
> submitting the bug report thru ema
Might want to create a Jira ticket at issues.apache.org instead of submitting
the bug report thru email.
On Mar 2, 2013, at 3:11 AM, "Andrew Prendergast"
wrote:
> *DESCRIPTION*
>
> When creating a table in all ANSI-SQL compliant RDBMS' the VARCHAR datatype
> takes a numeric parameter, however
It might be reasonable to enforce length on byte and string since this is
an upper limit, but just adding it to the grammer for compatability is just
more grammer. Personally I like nosql because of the nogrammer part, CQL
create table is not toocumbersome butI dont want to jump through hoops
speci
Just posting this as more of a talking point around comparing the behavior
of classical RDMBS to Cassandra. This bug is fixable over in the JDBC
driver, but look at isolation #2 & exception B:
http://code.google.com/a/apache-extras.org/p/cassandra-jdbc/issues/detail?id=72
It's coming from the ser
*DESCRIPTION*
When creating a table in all ANSI-SQL compliant RDBMS' the VARCHAR datatype
takes a numeric parameter, however this parameter is generating errors in
CQL3.
*STEPS TO REPRODUCE*
CREATE TABLE test (id BIGINT PRIMARY KEY, col1 VARCHAR(256)); // emits Bad
Request: line 1:54 mismatched
