incubator-cassandra-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: column sizes (was: online codes (?))
Date Wed, 03 Feb 2010 22:51:05 GMT
That's correct.

On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:49 PM, Michael Pearson <mjpearson@gmail.com> wrote:
> Thanks for the Gossip note, I'll keep reading up on the protocols.
> For key/column/disk I meant in terms of the Cassandra limitation -
>
> "The main limitation on column and supercolumn size is that all data
> for a single key and column must fit (on disk) on a single machine in
> the cluster."
>
> Is it right to think an entire supercolumn (so, possibly a very wide
> supercolumn of large object columns depending on the applications data
> model) needs to fit on a single node or am I off the mark.
>
> -Michael
>
> On Thu, Feb 4, 2010 at 8:28 AM, Jonathan Ellis <jbellis@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, Feb 3, 2010 at 4:25 PM, Michael Pearson <mjpearson@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> I'd imagine the gossip overhead and key/column per disk limitation is
>>> too open for abuse to recommend storing lob columns with any level of
>>> predictability, particularly if frequent updates are involved.
>>
>> Gossip overhead is constant for a given cluster size.  What do you
>> mean by key/column per disk limitation?
>>
>> -Jonathan
>>
>

Mime
View raw message