cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jeremy Dunck <jdu...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: handling deletes
Date Mon, 30 Mar 2009 23:37:42 GMT
On Mon, Mar 30, 2009 at 5:19 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbellis@gmail.com> wrote:
...
> Admittedly this is suboptimal compared to being able to GC immediately
> but it has the virtue of being (a) easily implemented, (b) with no
> extra components such as a coordination protocol, and (c) better than
> not GCing tombstones at all (the other easy way to ensure
> correctness).

I'm new here, so this may be a dumb objection, but:

It also assumes that the number of un-GC'able SSTables is small (as
compared to free disk space), right?   If nodes A and B kept a (key,
timestamp, tombstone) triple outside of the SSTable, then they could
tell the client to delete C rather than repairing A/B, right?  (Maybe
this is what you meant by 'coordination protocol'?)

Mime
View raw message