cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jonathan Ellis (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-6477) Partitioned indexes
Date Mon, 31 Mar 2014 15:03:22 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6477?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13955262#comment-13955262
] 

Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-6477:
-------------------------------------------

This does mean that a tombstone is not "just a tombstone," i.e., we will have to keep all
tombstones of this time for gcgs or a similar period, not just "the most recent post-merge
tombstone" as currently.

But it should be relatively rare to have racing tombstones, so the penalty vs the status quo
is not actually large in practice.

/cc [~mstump]

> Partitioned indexes
> -------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-6477
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6477
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>          Components: API, Core
>            Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
>             Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> Local indexes are suitable for low-cardinality data, where spreading the index across
the cluster is a Good Thing.  However, for high-cardinality data, local indexes require querying
most nodes in the cluster even if only a handful of rows is returned.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Mime
View raw message