As a user, I really appreciate your efforts Jeff & Brad. I would *love*
for the C* project to officially support this.
In our environment we have a lot of client machines that all share
common NFS mounted directories. It's much easier for us to create a
Python virtual environment on a file s
OT, but would gladly +1(nb) a `nodetool --output-format=json` CEP. :)
[ Some discussion also in:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-12698 ]
> On Jul 8, 2023, at 11:26 AM, Josh McKenzie wrote:
>
>> I think they should not parse that output in the first place. Gradually
>> introduc
> I think they should not parse that output in the first place. Gradually
> introducing JSON / YAML output formats for nodetool is cool but I think it
> started to happen too late and people were already parsing the raw nodetool
> output and here we are.
Yes And: as you say: "here we are".
I pe
If somebody understood my message as I am promoting the removal of all these
commands for which we have other means of getting the output of, that is not
the case at all. I do not want to remove any of them.. I am just elaborating on
"parsing the output of nodetool and problems related to that i
Thank you, Josh, for your insight.
I think they should not parse that output in the first place. Gradually
introducing JSON / YAML output formats for nodetool is cool but I think it
started to happen too late and people were already parsing the raw nodetool
output and here we are.
I played wit
> Once there is, we are free to change the default output however we want.
One thing I always try to keep in mind on discussions like this. A thought
experiment (with very hand-wavy numbers; try not to get hung up on them):
* Let's say there are 5,000 discrete "users" of C* out there (different g
