incubator-cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Boxenhorn <da...@lookin2.com>
Subject Re: Is SuperColumn necessary?
Date Tue, 11 May 2010 14:46:36 GMT
I would like an API with a variable number of arguments. Using Java varargs,
something like

value = keyspace.get("articles", "cars", "John Smith", "2010-05-01",
"comment-25");

or

valueArray = keyspace.get("articles", predicate1, predicate2, predicate3,
predicate4);


The storage layout would be determined by the configuration, as below:

<Column Name="ThingThatsNowKey" Indexed="True" ClusterPartitioned="True" ...



On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 5:26 PM, Jonathan Shook <jshook@gmail.com> wrote:

> This is one of the sticking points with the key concatenation
> argument. You can't simply access subpartitions of data along an
> aggregate name using a concatenated key unless you can efficiently
> address a range of the keys according to a property of a subset. I'm
> hoping this will bear out with more of this discussion.
>
> Another facet of this issue is performance with respect to storage
> layout. Presently columns within a row are inherently organized for
> efficient range operations. The key space is not generally optimal in
> this way. I'm hoping to see some discussion of this, as well.
>
> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 6:17 AM, vd <vineetdaniel@gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hi
> >
> > Can we make range search on ID:ID format as this would be treated as
> > single ID by API or can it bifurcate on ':' . If now then how do can
> > we ignore usage of supercolumns where we need to associate 'n' number
> > of rows to a single ID.
> > Like
> >          CatID1-> articleID1
> >          CatID1-> articleID2
> >          CatID1-> articleID3
> >          CatID1-> articleID4
> > How can we map such scenarios with simple column families.
> >
> > Rgds.
> >
> > On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 2:11 PM, Torsten Curdt <tcurdt@vafer.org> wrote:
> >> Exactly.
> >>
> >> On Tue, May 11, 2010 at 10:20, David Boxenhorn <david@lookin2.com>
> wrote:
> >>> Don't think of it as getting rid of supercolum. Think of it as adding
> >>> superdupercolums, supertriplecolums, etc. Or, in sparse array
> terminology:
> >>> array[dim1][dim2][dim3].....[dimN] = value
> >>>
> >>> Or, as said above:
> >>>
> >>>   <Column Name="ThingThatsNowKey" Indexed="True"
> ClusterPartitioned="True"
> >>> Type="UTF8">
> >>>     <Column Name="ThingThatsNowColumnFamily" DiskPartitioned="True"
> >>> Type="UTF8">
> >>>       <Column Name="ThingThatsNowSuperColumnName" Type="Long">
> >>>         <Column Name="ThingThatsNowColumnName" Indexed="True"
> Type="ASCII">
> >>>           <Column Name="ThingThatCantCurrentlyBeRepresented"/>
> >>>         </Column>
> >>>       </Column>
> >>>     </Column>
> >>>   </Column>
> >>
> >
>

Mime
View raw message