Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 16276 invoked from network); 9 Feb 2011 20:42:52 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 9 Feb 2011 20:42:52 -0000 Received: (qmail 16804 invoked by uid 500); 9 Feb 2011 20:42:50 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 16756 invoked by uid 500); 9 Feb 2011 20:42:49 -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 16748 invoked by uid 500); 9 Feb 2011 20:42:49 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-incubator-cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org Received: (qmail 16745 invoked by uid 99); 9 Feb 2011 20:42:49 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 20:42:49 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.0 required=5.0 tests=SPF_NEUTRAL,URI_HEX X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: neutral (athena.apache.org: 216.139.236.26 is neither permitted nor denied by domain of potekhin@bnl.gov) Received: from [216.139.236.26] (HELO sam.nabble.com) (216.139.236.26) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 20:42:44 +0000 Received: from jim.nabble.com ([192.168.236.80]) by sam.nabble.com with esmtp (Exim 4.69) (envelope-from ) id 1PnGrn-0007Bn-Tc for cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org; Wed, 09 Feb 2011 12:42:23 -0800 Date: Wed, 9 Feb 2011 12:42:23 -0800 (PST) From: buddhasystem To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org Message-ID: <1297284143888-6009462.post@n2.nabble.com> In-Reply-To: References: Subject: Re: Specifying row caching on per query basis ? MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit Jonathan, what if the data is really homogeneous, but over a long period of time. I decided that the users who hit the database for recent past should have a better ride. Splitting into a separate CF also has costs, right? In fact, if I were to go this way, do you think I can crank down the key caches? If yes, down to what level, zero? Thanks! Jonathan Ellis-3 wrote: > > Not really, no. If you can't trust LRU to cache the hottest rows > perhaps you should split the data into different ColumnFamilies. > > On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 1:43 PM, Ertio Lew wrote: >> Is this under consideration for future releases ? or being thought >> about!? >> >> >> >> On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 12:56 AM, Jonathan Ellis >> wrote: >>> Currently there is not. >>> >>> On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 12:04 PM, Ertio Lew wrote: >>>> Is there any way to specify on per query basis(like we specify the >>>> Consistency level), what rows be cached while you're reading them, >>>> from a row_cache enabled CF. I believe, this could lead to much more >>>> efficient use of the cache space!!( if you use same data for different >>>> features/ parts in your application which have different caching >>>> needs). >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Jonathan Ellis >>> Project Chair, Apache Cassandra >>> co-founder of DataStax, the source for professional Cassandra support >>> http://www.datastax.com >>> >> > > > > -- > Jonathan Ellis > Project Chair, Apache Cassandra > co-founder of DataStax, the source for professional Cassandra support > http://www.datastax.com > > -- View this message in context: http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Specifying-row-caching-on-per-query-basis-tp6008838p6009462.html Sent from the cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at Nabble.com.