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: domain of mvallebr@gmail.com designates
 209.85.214.44 as permitted sender)
MIME-Version: 1.0
In-Reply-To: <CC88DA37.11F55%Dean.Hiller@nrel.gov>
References: <CC88DA37.11F55%Dean.Hiller@nrel.gov>
Date: Thu, 27 Sep 2012 11:01:08 -0300
Message-ID: 
 <CABKQidt+BEK_T-CYD7bUXF3GTgoLtQDZ1sgTRnKJUppK3CKEBA@mail.gmail.com>
Subject: Re: 1000's of column families
From: Marcelo Elias Del Valle <mvallebr@gmail.com>
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=f46d040838d3004f8204caaf5f6c

--f46d040838d3004f8204caaf5f6c
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1

Out of curiosity, is it really necessary to have that amount of CFs?
I am probably still used to relational databases, where you would use a new
table just in case you need to store different kinds of data. As Cassandra
stores anything in each CF, it might probably make sense to have a lot of
CFs to store your data...
But why wouldn't you use a single CF with partitions in these case?
Wouldn't it be the same thing? I am asking because I might learn a new
modeling technique with the answer.

[]s

2012/9/26 Hiller, Dean <Dean.Hiller@nrel.gov>

> We are streaming data with 1 stream per 1 CF and we have 1000's of CF.
>  When using the tools they are all geared to analyzing ONE column family at
> a time :(.  If I remember correctly, Cassandra supports as many CF's as you
> want, correct?  Even though I am going to have tons of funs with
> limitations on the tools, correct?
>
> (I may end up wrapping the node tool with my own aggregate calls if needed
> to sum up multiple column families and such).
>
> Thanks,
> Dean
>


-- 
Marcelo Elias Del Valle
http://mvalle.com - @mvallebr

--f46d040838d3004f8204caaf5f6c
Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Out of curiosity, is it really necessary to have that amount of CFs?<div>I =
am probably still used to relational databases, where you would use a new t=
able just in case you need to store different kinds of data. As Cassandra s=
tores anything in each CF, it might probably make sense to have a lot of CF=
s to store your data...</div>
<div>But why wouldn&#39;t you use a single CF with partitions in these case=
? Wouldn&#39;t it be the same thing? I am asking because I might learn a ne=
w modeling technique with the answer.</div><div><br></div><div>[]s<br><br>
<div class=3D"gmail_quote">2012/9/26 Hiller, Dean <span dir=3D"ltr">&lt;<a =
href=3D"mailto:Dean.Hiller@nrel.gov" target=3D"_blank">Dean.Hiller@nrel.gov=
</a>&gt;</span><br><blockquote class=3D"gmail_quote" style=3D"margin:0 0 0 =
.8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
We are streaming data with 1 stream per 1 CF and we have 1000&#39;s of CF. =
=A0When using the tools they are all geared to analyzing ONE column family =
at a time :(. =A0If I remember correctly, Cassandra supports as many CF&#39=
;s as you want, correct? =A0Even though I am going to have tons of funs wit=
h limitations on the tools, correct?<br>

<br>
(I may end up wrapping the node tool with my own aggregate calls if needed =
to sum up multiple column families and such).<br>
<br>
Thanks,<br>
Dean<br>
</blockquote></div><br><br clear=3D"all"><div><br></div>-- <br>Marcelo Elia=
s Del Valle<br><a href=3D"http://mvalle.com" target=3D"_blank">http://mvall=
e.com</a>=A0- @mvallebr<br>
</div>

--f46d040838d3004f8204caaf5f6c--