They aren't even remotely similar, they're VERY different. Here's a few
starting points:
1) Most of Datastax's work for the first 5, 6, 8 years of existence focused
on driving users to cassandra from other DBs (see all of the "Cassandra
Summits" that eventually created trademark friction) ; Scylla
Thanks. For those interested: opened CASSANDRA-14415.
SK
On 2018-04-19 06:04, Benjamin Lerer wrote:
> Hi Sam,
>
> Your finding is interesting. Effectively, if the number of bytes to skip is
> larger than the remaining bytes in the buffer + the buffer size it could be
> faster to use seek.
> Fee
The main point is that we decided to take a strategic decision to invest in
the client
side. We always wanted to get to the state but for natural reasons, it took
us a while.
The client side changes aren't just about a small feature here and there or
stop at
thread per core. Think about the changes
On 2018-04-24 04:18, Nate McCall wrote:
Folks,
Before this goes much further, let's take a step back for a second.
I am hearing the following: Folks are fine with CASSANDRA-14311 and
CASSANDRA-2848 *BUT* they don't make much sense from the project's
perspective without a reference implementati
Eric,
You have to understand the poisonous GPL. It's very different from
Apache licensing in the sense that, roughly speaking, you're welcome to
contribute to Scylla, but legally barred from distributing it with or
inside any product you base on it unless your product source code is
also open
DataStax invested millions of dollars into Cassandra, tens of thousands of
man hours, hosted hundreds of events and has been a major factor in the
success of the project.
ScyllaDB wants us to change the C* protocol in order to improve features in
a competing database which contributes nothing back
Let met just say that as an observer to this conversation -- and someone
who believes that compatibility, extensibility, and frankly competition
bring out the best in products -- I'm fairly surprised and disappointed
with the apparent hostility many community members have shown toward a
sincere att
On 2018-04-23 17:59, Ben Bromhead wrote:
>> This doesn't work without additional changes, for RF>1. The
token ring could place two replicas of the same token range on the
same physical server, even though those are two separate cores of
the same server. You could add another el
I have not asked this list to do any work on the drivers.
If Cassandra agrees to Scylla protocol changes (either proactively or
retroactively) then the benefit to Cassandra is that if the drivers are
changed (by the driver maintainers or by Scylla developers) then
Cassandra developers need no
