Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: local policy)
DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=thelastpickle.com; h=content-type
	:mime-version:subject:from:in-reply-to:date
	:content-transfer-encoding:message-id:references:to; q=dns; s=
	thelastpickle.com; b=Ur7U/NEyL/DY+9nPIkh8VC3bm73V9hkytGc1o3ncoJs
	NVF7siCxg/96YySX5x/W15B6a1kiNVLlED50BmWNZ5rKJdmh7ZOVh3KJ9HriGxLR
	+LRYURP1o42fWc9wkEt89KSF269X/mjlPRiBNMN7V2yPy5R4NuyjfqFcqQUQzbI4
	=
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
Mime-Version: 1.0 (Apple Message framework v1244.3)
Subject: Re: Do we have any restrictions on the number of column families in a
 keyspace?
From: aaron morton <aaron@thelastpickle.com>
In-Reply-To: 
 <CAGYDNRue_5QTjuJ3yvfTbh9WHs7Qwjw8ANydcuUfkunJYMFndA@mail.gmail.com>
Date: Wed, 3 Aug 2011 22:17:12 +1000
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Message-Id: <92DBFD43-7BED-4FDF-8592-65D9BC17D451@thelastpickle.com>
References: <3DC7AAB1DB7749BFAC3ED289FF126A35@gmail.com>
 <CAGYDNRue_5QTjuJ3yvfTbh9WHs7Qwjw8ANydcuUfkunJYMFndA@mail.gmail.com>
To: user@cassandra.apache.org

There were never any restrictions other than common sense.=20

The more you make, even under 0.8, the more frequently you have to flush =
to disk. 0.8 automates the memory management, which used to involve =
random guesses, and basically makes it's usable.=20

So I'm just saying there is a down side. If you create CF's like you =
would create tables in a RDBMS you will probably have some unhappy days =
ahead.=20

cheers

-----------------
Aaron Morton
Freelance Cassandra Developer
@aaronmorton
http://www.thelastpickle.com

On 3 Aug 2011, at 18:14, samal wrote:

> yes for 0.7=20
> no for 0.8