cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sylvain Lebresne (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-2641) AbstractBounds.normalize should deal with overlapping ranges
Date Thu, 12 May 2011 07:58:47 GMT


Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-2641:

As far as I can tell, normalize() and getPositionsForRanges() are dealing correctly with overlapping
ranges, albeit arguably inefficiently. It's true that overlapping ranges would result in streaming
twice the overlapping sections, but that's an efficiency problem, so I don't think an assert
is the solution.
We could add a pass to normalize() so that it merges intersecting ranges. But that being said,
I don't think we ever generate a list of overlapping ranges and given what our ranges represents
I see no reason why that would change. 

> AbstractBounds.normalize should deal with overlapping ranges
> ------------------------------------------------------------
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-2641
>                 URL:
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Test
>          Components: Core
>            Reporter: Stu Hood
>            Assignee: Stu Hood
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 1.0
> Apparently no consumers have encountered it in production, but AbstractBounds.normalize
does not handle overlapping ranges. If given overlapping ranges, the output will be sorted
but still overlapping, for which SSTableReader.getPositionsForRanges will choose ranges in
an SSTable that may overlap.
> We should either add an assert in normalize(), or in getPositionsForRanges() to ensure
that this never bites us in production.

This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see:

View raw message