Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 69448 invoked from network); 31 Aug 2010 20:02:18 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 31 Aug 2010 20:02:18 -0000 Received: (qmail 30386 invoked by uid 500); 31 Aug 2010 20:02:16 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 30350 invoked by uid 500); 31 Aug 2010 20:02:15 -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 30342 invoked by uid 99); 31 Aug 2010 20:02:15 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:02:15 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=0.0 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jbellis@gmail.com designates 209.85.216.179 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.216.179] (HELO mail-qy0-f179.google.com) (209.85.216.179) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 20:02:08 +0000 Received: by qyk9 with SMTP id 9so6952872qyk.10 for ; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:01:47 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:received:mime-version:received:in-reply-to :references:from:date:message-id:subject:to:content-type; bh=CyIpRyE3Ge8h0hp5H5e10KAJw34qg9o1Pydzf8UGcQk=; b=kdii9bljdhmyi/97As3dS8N7voYGVUPV0xu4/p4qGzR/LbAWM6lJVGnSg2Wu/VR5g6 CViVQlwCFhcTqKlCNRHJB16JGMNsNGGTGo5QFg6wMHunNNyYQ3S1uAfCZyy61/pRTyDh q114OAV1DPkpd1V3Zu9ycVsu1mvCLxJwTgkwc= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:from:date:message-id:subject:to :content-type; b=VIcZUwxz2q81RWFvFlUxVEhZzwtgAP02K2nmw4LpcHKYqoo+yNExqjvQQlgmo3+Ehy JNWDDV6eyD617TFt6z5e27WFKZT/utOK5cL2kXo+aJSfGmuE2nyw3gDuZbAkGbSAhyMO nZzJPyG5oPjwkEo1UNHuVp7GJOTCXvlfATQLQ= Received: by 10.220.124.28 with SMTP id s28mr3454197vcr.138.1283284901531; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 13:01:41 -0700 (PDT) MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.220.201.129 with HTTP; Tue, 31 Aug 2010 12:59:30 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: <968b952c-6621-ca3d-af24-974b81e174f7@me.com> <21AE7234-13D9-4315-8A0E-AA81B927A678@ecyrd.com> From: Jonathan Ellis Date: Tue, 31 Aug 2010 14:59:30 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: column family names To: user@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 5:05 AM, Terje Marthinussen wrote: > No benefit? > Making it easier to use column families as part of your data model is a > fairly good benefit No, it's not. (This is why I'm of the opinion that blog posts encouraging thinking of the cassandra model as a 4-level nested hash are counterproductive.)