cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jonathan Ellis (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] Commented: (CASSANDRA-389) SSTable Versioning
Date Tue, 12 Jan 2010 15:39:54 GMT


Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-389:

as noted in CASSANDRA-521, we need to add the partitioner used to the sstable data file. 
is there any value to keeping version in filename once we are already adding partitioner to
data file itself?  (IMO the alternative, cramming partitioner into filename, is silly, and
what if version N + 1 needs a 3rd piece of metadata?)

> SSTable Versioning
> ------------------
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-389
>                 URL:
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Core
>            Reporter: Chris Goffinet
>            Assignee: Stu Hood
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 0.9
>         Attachments: 389-v3.patch, 389-v4.patch, 389-v5-1-rebase-v4-for-trunk.diff, 389-v5-2-add-keyspace-to-descriptor.diff,
389-v5-3-use-descriptor-for-streaming.diff, 389-v5-4-validate-parameters-for-descriptor.diff,
389-v5-5-special-case-to-preserve-legacy.diff, CASSANDRA-389.diff, CASSANDRA-389.diff
> As we continue to make changes to the on-disk format of SSTables, I propose we start
versioning. The easiest way without breaking backwards compatibility is to store the version
in the filename. This would allow us to figure out the version without looking at the SSTable
data. After speaking to Jonathan here is the proposed example:

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.

View raw message