cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Aleksey Yeschenko (JIRA)" <>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-10311) It looks like our type alterations may be buggy
Date Thu, 12 Nov 2015 18:22:11 GMT


Aleksey Yeschenko commented on CASSANDRA-10311:

At least {{IntegerType::isValueCompatibleWithInternal}} is certainly broken, something else
might too.

> It looks like our type alterations may be buggy
> -----------------------------------------------
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-10311
>                 URL:
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Benedict
> We should document how type coercion works, in all contexts (UDFs, query responses, merging),
and what our criteria are for success. Right now it looks like we perform no conversion, so
we should require that they are compared in the same way (if they are clusterings), and that
they at least have the same number of bytes (if both fixed width).
> Integer type considers itself value compatible with Int32 and Long, which from an AlterTable
point of view at least seems potentially problematic. 
> It's very likely I'm missing something. However as it stands we seem able to read an
old type from an sstable, have it make it through a compaction unscathed, and write out the
same bytes "as" the new type. If I'm correct about this behaviour, this will corrupt this
partition in the new sstable so that it cannot be read.
> Not marking as critical/blocker, as I'm not familiar enough with how this works to say
if this brief analysis is correct, but if I am we should raise the priority.

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

View raw message