Return-Path: 
 <user-return-13971-apmail-cassandra-user-archive=cassandra.apache.org@cassandra.apache.org>
Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org
Received: (qmail 64773 invoked from network); 24 Feb 2011 18:09:35 -0000
Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3)
  by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 24 Feb 2011 18:09:35 -0000
Received: (qmail 80841 invoked by uid 500); 24 Feb 2011 18:09:33 -0000
Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org
Received: (qmail 80685 invoked by uid 500); 24 Feb 2011 18:09:31 -0000
Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
List-Help: <mailto:user-help@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Unsubscribe: <mailto:user-unsubscribe@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Post: <mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>
List-Id: <user.cassandra.apache.org>
Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Delivered-To: mailing list user@cassandra.apache.org
Received: (qmail 80677 invoked by uid 99); 24 Feb 2011 18:09:30 -0000
Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 18:09:30 +0000
X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.5 required=5.0
	tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_NEUTRAL,URI_HEX
X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org
Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: local policy)
Received: from [74.125.82.172] (HELO mail-wy0-f172.google.com) (74.125.82.172)
    by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 18:09:25 +0000
Received: by wyb42 with SMTP id 42so853437wyb.31
        for <user@cassandra.apache.org>; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:09:03 -0800 (PST)
MIME-Version: 1.0
Received: by 10.227.133.212 with SMTP id g20mr1140700wbt.65.1298570935704;
 Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:08:55 -0800 (PST)
Received: by 10.227.157.65 with HTTP; Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:08:55 -0800 (PST)
In-Reply-To: <1298568880974-6061197.post@n2.nabble.com>
References: <1298501380608-6058238.post@n2.nabble.com>
	<3845211436698111047@unknownmsgid>
	<1298568880974-6061197.post@n2.nabble.com>
Date: Thu, 24 Feb 2011 10:08:55 -0800
Message-ID: <AANLkTi=Yb7uQ=1jkTao7EFMvZfMqqE+wKN3BoUo6eAU3@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: Understanding Indexes
From: Ed Anuff <ed@anuff.com>
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016367fb7a1569c6b049d0b1b85

--0016367fb7a1569c6b049d0b1b85
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

If you mean does it make sense to have a CF where each row contains a set of
keys to other rows in another CF, then yes, that's a common design pattern,
although usually it's because you're creating collections of those rows
(i.e. a Groups CF where each row consists of a set of keys to rows in the
Users CF).  Not sure if that's what you're getting at, though.

On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:34 AM, mcasandra <mohitanchlia@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> Generally no. But yes if retrieving the key through index is faster than
> going through the hash buckets.
>
> Currently I am thinking there could be 100s of million or billion of rows
> and in that case if we have to retrieve a row which one will be fast going
> through hash bucket or index? I am thinking in such scenario Index would be
> faster. Please help me understand where I am going wrong. Some example will
> be helpful.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Understanding-Indexes-tp6058238p6061197.html
> Sent from the cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at
> Nabble.com.
>

--0016367fb7a1569c6b049d0b1b85
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

If you mean does it make sense to have a CF where each row contains a set o=
f keys to other rows in another CF, then yes, that&#39;s a common design pa=
ttern, although usually it&#39;s because you&#39;re creating collections of=
 those rows (i.e. a Groups CF where each row consists of a set of keys to r=
ows in the Users CF).=A0 Not sure if that&#39;s what you&#39;re getting at,=
 though.<br>
<br><div class=3D"gmail_quote">On Thu, Feb 24, 2011 at 9:34 AM, mcasandra <=
span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a href=3D"mailto:mohitanchlia@gmail.com">mohitanchlia=
@gmail.com</a>&gt;</span> wrote:<br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=
=3D"margin: 0pt 0pt 0pt 0.8ex; border-left: 1px solid rgb(204, 204, 204); p=
adding-left: 1ex;">
<br>
Generally no. But yes if retrieving the key through index is faster than<br=
>
going through the hash buckets.<br>
<br>
Currently I am thinking there could be 100s of million or billion of rows<b=
r>
and in that case if we have to retrieve a row which one will be fast going<=
br>
through hash bucket or index? I am thinking in such scenario Index would be=
<br>
faster. Please help me understand where I am going wrong. Some example will=
<br>
be helpful.<br>
<font color=3D"#888888">--<br>
View this message in context: <a href=3D"http://cassandra-user-incubator-ap=
ache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Understanding-Indexes-tp6058238p6061197.html=
" target=3D"_blank">http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.n=
abble.com/Understanding-Indexes-tp6058238p6061197.html</a><br>

</font><div><div></div><div class=3D"h5">Sent from the <a href=3D"mailto:ca=
ssandra-user@incubator.apache.org">cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org</a> =
mailing list archive at Nabble.com.<br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br>

--0016367fb7a1569c6b049d0b1b85--