> Just telling C* to store a byte[] *will* be slightly lighter-weight
> than giving it named columns, but we're talking negligible compared to
> the overhead of actually moving the data on or off disk in the first
> place.
Hm - but isn't this exactly the point? You don't want to move data off disk
Oh my this all sounds very alarming. Should I be confused? Or even the
other way around?
On 19/05/2012 08:08, Radim Kolar wrote:
because cassandra 1.0 is not sufficiently stable, what about to make
cassandra 1.0 default download and add bottom line - cassandra 1.0 is
also available.
I seen t
Well fwiw this is my perspecive as a user:
Software does not stabilize in sherry casks it does so by beining used.
If you don't release than it's not being used because only few use betas.
Nobody forces you to use the latest version. You can deploy latest on
your test system and watch it for a
