Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 82668D982 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:02:37 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 71242 invoked by uid 500); 28 Aug 2012 17:02:37 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-accumulo-user-archive@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 71217 invoked by uid 500); 28 Aug 2012 17:02:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@accumulo.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@accumulo.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@accumulo.apache.org Received: (qmail 71209 invoked by uid 99); 28 Aug 2012 17:02:37 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:02:37 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.5 required=5.0 tests=FSL_RCVD_USER,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_SOFTFAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: softfail (athena.apache.org: transitioning domain of wilhelm.von.cloud@accumulo.net does not designate 209.85.214.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.214.169] (HELO mail-ob0-f169.google.com) (209.85.214.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 17:02:31 +0000 Received: by obhx4 with SMTP id x4so12684578obh.0 for ; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:02:11 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:x-originating-ip:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type:x-gm-message-state; bh=dPjs9nORxyQ6YjTE//1KWrE9dj42M14IaIAjmXWI83w=; b=nRLwZxDuZOcBIVyaSpBHQD5Gz9evwRfdQOqsgfrBtFvKfpoBVygv5TuA9TsgEc9BIr hj2XPC0tw55FT8om7iSZ7AuixDtr2jjcrC8HZiNfXjn8DrjICr0rWDAt5wLDhkrIB8DS 7qzVJ/YdzwvaU+I3wQ6ZLVLXNDaBru7x7OD7mJ+wPsioKoq9YxQdo/TvcEoz6rvWmS/l z0wLpEB4hPnpx8D4llc9OZK0b80rCkmmoLpOUjI138vb7liCgLoSOimDqDPAfSYTEQae pJBrR3inroG5sYT9stUwBs+9IsJBSx7g1VVVQcLIiWH7oJSWu003m3LZwbupEefG3JqS mhlQ== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.60.171.68 with SMTP id as4mr13455755oec.117.1346173331011; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:02:11 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.60.9.73 with HTTP; Tue, 28 Aug 2012 10:02:10 -0700 (PDT) X-Originating-IP: [144.51.26.95] In-Reply-To: <97EB0FF1279CC5428640A3FB61B10BD602DC64FB@mx1.Comcept.L-3Com.com> References: <97EB0FF1279CC5428640A3FB61B10BD602DC640F@mx1.Comcept.L-3Com.com> <503CC895.7020307@ccri.com> <97EB0FF1279CC5428640A3FB61B10BD602DC64FB@mx1.Comcept.L-3Com.com> Date: Tue, 28 Aug 2012 13:02:10 -0400 Message-ID: Subject: Re: TimeSpan Iterator From: William Slacum To: user@accumulo.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=bcaec550aea83379ea04c8566701 X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQlNiExRvh9Y+v8t/5hbO/74loTFh1eW7s8/+N9uWJ1GYRDZV9RPq0RFUE+OsV2BB3boPSgk X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --bcaec550aea83379ea04c8566701 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It could be inefficient if you can't narrow down your search of a table to specific ranges, via an index or some hint stored in the key that you can use to seek() around. You're left with doing an exhaustive search of the data, even if clients will only see data that matches your filtering criteria. On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:51 PM, wrote: > Billie**** > > ** ** > > Your comment =93Users should be aware that this is not an efficient > operation, though.=94 may help me decide if my current use of a secondary > time index is better then. Right now I maintain a table that has > timestamps as the rowid whose values are the rowid in a metadata table. > Therefore I do one range scan based on the timestamp. Then a second look= up > of the metadata rowid. Is this more efficient? **** > > ** ** > > *From:* Billie Rinaldi [mailto:billie@apache.org] > *Sent:* Tuesday, August 28, 2012 11:46 > > *To:* user@accumulo.apache.org; john.armstrong@ccri.com > *Subject:* Re: TimeSpan Iterator**** > > ** ** > > On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 6:33 AM, John Armstrong wrote:***= * > > On 08/28/2012 09:26 AM, Bob.Thorman@l-3com.com wrote:**** > > Does anyone know of a TimeSpan Iterator that will fetch rows based on > the accumulo timestamp?**** > > ** ** > > We actually wrote our own TimestampRangeIterator and TimestampSetIterator > classes. I don't know if 1.4 has any in the core libraries. It's not ve= ry > hard though.**** > > > There's a TimestampFilter in org.apache.accumulo.core.iterators.user in > 1.4. It uses a range of timestamps. Users should be aware that this is > not an efficient operation, though. > > Billie**** > --bcaec550aea83379ea04c8566701 Content-Type: text/html; charset=windows-1252 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable It could be inefficient if you can't narrow down your search of a table= to specific ranges, via an index or some hint stored in the key that you c= an use to seek() around. You're left with doing an exhaustive search of= the data, even if clients will only see data that matches your filtering c= riteria.

On Tue, Aug 28, 2012 at 12:51 PM, <Bo= b.Thorman@l-3com.com> wrote:

Billie

=A0

Your comment =93Users should be aware = that this is not an efficient operation, though.= =94 may help me decide if my current use of a secondary time index is bette= r then.=A0 Right now I maintain a table that has timestamps as the rowid wh= ose values are the rowid in a metadata table.=A0 Therefore I do one range s= can based on the timestamp.=A0 Then a second lookup of the metadata rowid.= =A0 Is this more efficient?=A0

=A0<= /p>

From: Billie R= inaldi [mailto:billi= e@apache.org]
Sent: Tuesday, August 28, 2012 11:46

To: u= ser@accumulo.apache.org; john.armstrong@ccri.com
Subject: Re: TimeSpan Iterator

=A0

On Tue, Aug 2= 8, 2012 at 6:33 AM, John Armstrong <jrja@ccri.com> wrote:

On 08/28/2012 09:26 AM, Bob.Thorman@l-3com.com wrote:=

Does anyone know of a TimeSpan Iterator that will fe= tch rows based on
the accumulo timestamp?

=A0

We actually wro= te our own TimestampRangeIterator and TimestampSetIterator classes. =A0I do= n't know if 1.4 has any in the core libraries. =A0It's not very har= d though.


There's a TimestampFilter= in org.apache.accumulo.core.iterators.user in 1.4.=A0 It uses a range of t= imestamps.=A0 Users should be aware that this is not an efficient operation= , though.

Billie


--bcaec550aea83379ea04c8566701--