cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Sylvain Lebresne (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-9802) Better page size for aggregates in cqlsh
Date Tue, 14 Jul 2015 16:38:04 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9802?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14626612#comment-14626612
] 

Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-9802:
---------------------------------------------

bq. Why are we not internally using our own page size as we know when it is an aggregate.

I don't understand that sentence. Who are we in "our own page size"? (ps: have you read CASSANDRA-9724
for context? I might have answered your question there)

> Better page size for aggregates in cqlsh
> ----------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-9802
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9802
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Sylvain Lebresne
>            Assignee: Benjamin Lerer
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.x
>
>
> As discussed in CASSANDRA-9724, cqlsh uses a small page size (100) which makes sense
for "normal" queries since you don't want to flood the terminal, but is quite sub-optimal
for aggregates where the page size is used as the internal page size for the aggregate (there
is thus no terminal flooding concerns and a page size of 100 is too low).
> We should thus make cqlsh use a bigger page size (stick with the python driver default
for instance) when dealing with aggregate queries. According to Tyler:
> bq. it's not trivial, but it is possible. It should take a day or less of work.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message