cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Fabrizio Bottino (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Comment Edited] (CASSANDRA-10374) List and Map values incorrectly limited to 64k size
Date Thu, 03 Dec 2015 10:10:11 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10374?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15037602#comment-15037602
] 

Fabrizio Bottino edited comment on CASSANDRA-10374 at 12/3/15 10:09 AM:
------------------------------------------------------------------------

Maybe we can add a new configuration option (something like "enable_big_collection_values")
which is default to false in 2.1 and 2.2 so nothing changes unless some wants it, and is default
to true on >= 3.0, with a proper comment (in 2.1/2.2) which inform users that enabling
that option breakes compatibility with protocols v1 and v2.

Can this be good enough ?


was (Author: fabryb):
Maybe we can add a new configuration option (something like "enable_big_collection_values")
which is default to false in 2.1 and 2.2 so nothing changes unless some wants it, and is default
to true on >= 3.0, with a proper comment (in 2.1/2.2) which inform users that enabling
that option breakes compatibility with protocols v1 and v2.

Should this be good enough ?

> List and Map values incorrectly limited to 64k size
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-10374
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10374
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Tyler Hobbs
>            Assignee: Benjamin Lerer
>            Priority: Minor
>             Fix For: 3.0.1, 3.1, 2.1.x, 2.2.x
>
>
> With the v3 native protocol, we switched from encoding collection element sizes with
shorts to ints.  However, in {{Lists.java}} and {{Maps.java}}, we still validate that list
and map values are smaller than {{MAX_UNSIGNED_SHORT}}.
> Map keys and set elements are stored in the cell name, so they're implicitly limited
to the cell name size limit of 64k.  However, for non-frozen collections, this limitation
should not apply, so we probably don't want to perform this check here for those either.
> The fix should include tests where we exceed the 64k limit for frozen and non-frozen
collections.  In the case of non-frozen lists and maps, we should verify that the 64k cell-name
size limit is enforced in a friendly way.



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

Mime
View raw message