[CASSANDRA-11075] Consider making SASI the default index implementation

• Type: Improvement
• Status: Open
• Priority: Normal
• Resolution: Unresolved
• Component/s: Feature/SASI
• Labels: sasi
• Assignee: Pavel Yaskevich
• Reporter: Sylvain Lebresne

Authors

Pavel Yaskevich

• Created: 27/Jan/16 09:36
• Updated: 16/Apr/19 09:30

Description

We now have 2 secondary index implementation in tree: the old native ones and SASI. Moving forward, that feels like one too much to maintain, especially since it seems that SASI is an overall better implementation.

So we should gather enough data to decide if SASI is indeed always better (or at least sufficiently better than we're convinced no-one would want to stick with the native implementation), and if that's the case, we should consider making it the default (and ultimately get rid of the current implementation).

So first, we should at least:

1. double check that SASI handles all cases that the native implementation handles. A good start would probably be run all our dtest and utests on a version where SASI is hard-coded as default.
2. compare the performance of SASI and native indexes. In particular our native indexes, in all their weaknesses, have the advantage of not doing a read-before-write. Haven't looked at SASI much so I don't know if it's the case but anyway, we need numbers on both reads and writes.

Once we have that, if we do decide to make SASI the default, then we need to figure out what is the upgrade path (and whether we add extra syntax for SASI specific options).