Mailing-List: contact cassandra-user-help@incubator.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of cagatay.kavukcuoglu@gmail.com
 designates 209.85.219.212 as permitted sender)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws;
        d=gmail.com; s=gamma;
        h=mime-version:reply-to:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id
         :subject:to:content-type:content-transfer-encoding;
        b=iXyuy36kxzElOAh6JQxsrU5zXHC9ZdXJEXodkVfRcuoXKxrLRgLKNm8IRrs76YgLdm
         K30QIrdN39kuMdXrz0j9pnuwuqMrEh4xA/Ct1mlAvZxh1FL/4PGiGQZirGhyj7k91+e6
         YlI6xuUCqvH2dT2AC7zjrRxahUf1DlEbsY2kQ=
MIME-Version: 1.0
Reply-To: cagatay@kavukcuoglu.org
In-Reply-To: <e06563881002011500q1855fecepceb0ded24583a7e3@mail.gmail.com>
References: <35b8f8001002011445s3eea029j72cf7953761e1946@mail.gmail.com>
	<e06563881002011500q1855fecepceb0ded24583a7e3@mail.gmail.com>
From: Cagatay Kavukcuoglu <cagatay.kavukcuoglu@gmail.com>
Date: Mon, 1 Feb 2010 20:32:38 -0500
Message-ID: <35b8f8001002011732s5303275cga913eae501f30810@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Recommended way to do parallel reads of a large column slice?
To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=UTF-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

A large column slice in my case is tens of thousands of columns, each
a few K's in size and independent in processing from others. My plan
was to read slices of a few hundred to a thousand columns and process
them in a pipeline for reduced overall latency. Regardless of my
specific case, though, I thought one of the best ways to get good
performance scaling in Cassandra was to distribute reads and writes to
multiple nodes. Are there situations where that's not a good idea?

CK.

On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 6:00 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbellis@gmail.com> wrote:
> No. =C2=A0Why do you want to do multiple parallel reads instead of one
> sequential read?
>
> On Mon, Feb 1, 2010 at 4:45 PM, Cagatay Kavukcuoglu
> <cagatay@kavukcuoglu.org> wrote:
>> Hi,
>>
>> What's the recommended way to do parallel reads of a large slice of
>> columns when one doesn't know enough about the column names to divide
>> them for parallel reading in a meaningful way? SliceRange allows
>> setting the start and finish column names, but you wouldn't be able to
>> set the start field of the next read until the previous read
>> completed. An offset field for the SliceRange would have worked, but I
>> don't see it. Is there a way to divide the big read query into
>> multiple *parallel* small read queries without requiring advance
>> knowledge of the column names?
>>
>> CK.
>>
>