Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id F011110B55 for ; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 01:10:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 91169 invoked by uid 500); 18 Jul 2013 01:10:00 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 91146 invoked by uid 500); 18 Jul 2013 01:10:00 -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 91138 invoked by uid 99); 18 Jul 2013 01:10:00 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 01:10:00 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (athena.apache.org: domain of tsato@cloudian.com designates 209.85.223.169 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.223.169] (HELO mail-ie0-f169.google.com) (209.85.223.169) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 18 Jul 2013 01:09:55 +0000 Received: by mail-ie0-f169.google.com with SMTP id 10so5782511ied.28 for ; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:09:34 -0700 (PDT) X-Google-DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=google.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type :x-gm-message-state; bh=coSimOFP6p1J3LzZRwWBpkwj9dBOWkLeu18JbSLBeyo=; b=Pvrusve17yBUAOdgLogwRnkYr9VSxoYlW1PSvqHBNm96EQ4s0zyVfSzp4F08+SkY7U HTtXHENevqLCPy4508PHMdUHhXnsFBoxV/bNrRNAuZir7NDFz+Az9vw9WyfJM92i3BtQ je+GpWXY4hnrQCEPMxTvCvyl8kHrR1rmqZyt/YCLTAjn22e3emMevAk8+OH7kayHoWjh mtTgk+8RKaFXHnz2BixJbQNe8nHeok6JXesZMnFuDa8pBOTINQlLkA2ktN96RRe2KxCC IK4Y2r2CTjhIirlai3Ed+3DBpqvO6SodPid/cV3ujEjv5kT/fdU/3XTdJ9r1GIvD3dwd YOZA== MIME-Version: 1.0 X-Received: by 10.50.18.81 with SMTP id u17mr2248604igd.8.1374109774840; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:09:34 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.64.147.8 with HTTP; Wed, 17 Jul 2013 18:09:34 -0700 (PDT) Date: Thu, 18 Jul 2013 10:09:34 +0900 Message-ID: Subject: Fp chance for column level bloom filter From: Takenori Sato To: user@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=089e01494788031bfd04e1beddcb X-Gm-Message-State: ALoCoQnAcpbuYLEg+SLGO/B3ARusOxlXGyXH2RR/bizPI5YQVDHywRpvj6/sIBec4PkCwf21BndM X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --089e01494788031bfd04e1beddcb Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 Hi, I thought memory consumption of column level bloom filter will become a big concern when a row becomes very wide like more than tens of millions of columns. But I read from source(1.0.7) that fp chance for column level bloom filter is hard-coded as 0.160, which is very high. So seems not. Is this correct? Thanks, Takenori --089e01494788031bfd04e1beddcb Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
Hi,

I thought memory consump= tion of column level bloom filter will become a big concern when a row beco= mes very wide like more than tens of millions of columns.=A0

But I read from source(1.0.7) that fp chance for colum= n level bloom filter is hard-coded as 0.160, which is very high. So seems n= ot.

Is this correct?

Thanks,
Takenori
--089e01494788031bfd04e1beddcb--