Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 29797 invoked from network); 11 Mar 2011 06:43:48 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 11 Mar 2011 06:43:48 -0000 Received: (qmail 8683 invoked by uid 500); 11 Mar 2011 06:43:45 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 8660 invoked by uid 500); 11 Mar 2011 06:43:45 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 8652 invoked by uid 99); 11 Mar 2011 06:43:45 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Mar 2011 06:43:45 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of thebachellor@gmail.com designates 209.85.220.172 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.220.172] (HELO mail-vx0-f172.google.com) (209.85.220.172) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Fri, 11 Mar 2011 06:43:36 +0000 Received: by vxg33 with SMTP id 33so2759837vxg.31 for ; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:43:15 -0800 (PST) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version :content-type:x-mailer:thread-index:content-language; bh=VPOL3G14niUhKYDtRjr7x1GjVsmEDJ2eNqM4NGe3XVc=; b=odU/e0kJ7YyCECsRGHP8CbctYiGnffuFV9GE9PhdQHpvaMnpVCQ0dgj0VaAp+CIU8n eCLj9iilcCMsp3LdZ+ASLvH5QACF/zp3koKY4wIWpzXBuRpH6HGzTIBCUs26ekvuvhGd K/4nS7/fnkIbVY1o0lMrn5uuyZUVCkurCRWOA= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=from:to:subject:date:message-id:mime-version:content-type:x-mailer :thread-index:content-language; b=b8sHu8E13LPORptrEW/lv/NS+h9t8WyIwjkFg2YCVr//NceZ/aWo+C6krOPBoe8WN9 4Q00wvTKrF7E1AGpN2BadRMO4lGju+vn9gp/LEFaJFZ+hMatlNwSp0GP3Yfd6FW7q5HZ MEmkoRSJeL5/Q4G03MqfkWnrmT2Z2Xa9MZNoU= Received: by 10.52.69.206 with SMTP id g14mr1492418vdu.240.1299825795653; Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:43:15 -0800 (PST) Received: from KevinPC ([74.72.145.76]) by mx.google.com with ESMTPS id j15sm1497909vcs.44.2011.03.10.22.43.14 (version=TLSv1/SSLv3 cipher=OTHER); Thu, 10 Mar 2011 22:43:15 -0800 (PST) From: "Kevin" To: Subject: Secondary indices: Why low cardinality? Date: Fri, 11 Mar 2011 01:43:03 -0500 Message-ID: <001001cbdfb7$92cf9d00$b86ed700$@gmail.com> MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary="----=_NextPart_000_0011_01CBDF8D.A9FAA670" X-Mailer: Microsoft Outlook 14.0 Thread-Index: Acvft47TbwT0xwKhQ6C96A18gukvKw== Content-Language: en-us X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org This is a multipart message in MIME format. ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01CBDF8D.A9FAA670 Content-Type: text/plain; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit There's pretty limited information on Cassandra's built-in secondary index facility as is, but trying to find out why the secondary index has to have low cardinality has been like finding a needle in a haystack..that is floating somewhere in the Atlantic. Can someone explain why low cardinality is advised for the secondary index? Has this been confirmed by anyone else besides DataStax? ------=_NextPart_000_0011_01CBDF8D.A9FAA670 Content-Type: text/html; charset="us-ascii" Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

There’s pretty limited information on = Cassandra’s built-in secondary index facility as is, but trying to = find out why the secondary index has to have low cardinality has been = like finding a needle in a haystack….that is floating somewhere in = the Atlantic.

 

Can someone explain why low cardinality is advised for = the secondary index? Has this been confirmed by anyone else besides = DataStax?

 

------=_NextPart_000_0011_01CBDF8D.A9FAA670--