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 91E829CB8 for ; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 01:25:31 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 31493 invoked by uid 500); 25 Mar 2012 01:25:29 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 31458 invoked by uid 500); 25 Mar 2012 01:25:29 -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 31449 invoked by uid 99); 25 Mar 2012 01:25:29 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 01:25:29 +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 (nike.apache.org: domain of mohitanchlia@gmail.com designates 209.85.160.44 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.160.44] (HELO mail-pb0-f44.google.com) (209.85.160.44) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Sun, 25 Mar 2012 01:25:21 +0000 Received: by pbbrq13 with SMTP id rq13so4327731pbb.31 for ; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 18:25:00 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=20120113; h=mime-version:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=p4D7K3XIBSRJDAb7SJKyZRZPPOR+pV7qrRUawz+qbJA=; b=mvbjksGyAVavjOKer3QVsIdFFAU+QuS5VpFnIn6lfRjr9rUVbzO43N7IpKNb4D4vDC QG5gWmUb4h3IIEc702i4bjB0o4FBJZiL6WdIsFq5cFwBxDdtfJckPF5oBLrMMLmXVy/w rsukzF0+RCDEmx7HoNu/7mDjVc+u05w89nwHzm/P4O8sp29SjVdS58Qw6e8U3Q07EALM A9JKPZFymWBvSyb0l0nEW8Pe6H7q1UHNqsO9Xpf4PqWFZaSaEUQ74/qUS8MdsYiHVYHd UUnk+KnzB+0wtD3orANM56VQCkbvmNumKwQ9rykEyDRhXOErq+kXxfvMbaAfWN2ESU8o 7mng== MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.68.223.33 with SMTP id qr1mr41310845pbc.47.1332638700152; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 18:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.68.221.73 with HTTP; Sat, 24 Mar 2012 18:25:00 -0700 (PDT) Date: Sat, 24 Mar 2012 18:25:00 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Performance overhead when using start and end columns From: Mohit Anchlia To: user@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=047d7b1634bf5627c904bc072097 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --047d7b1634bf5627c904bc072097 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 I have rows with around 2K-50K columns but when I do a query I only need to fetch few columns between start and end columns. I was wondering what performance overhead does it cause by using slice query with start and end columns? Looking at the code it looks like when you give start and end column it goes in IndexSliceReader logic, but it's hard to tell how much overhead on an average one would see? Or is it even worth worrying about? --047d7b1634bf5627c904bc072097 Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable
I have rows with around 2K-50K columns but when I do a query I only ne= ed to fetch few columns between start and end columns. I was wondering what= performance overhead does it cause by using slice query with start and end= columns?
=A0
Looking at the code it looks like when you give start and end column i= t goes in IndexSliceReader logic, but it's hard to tell how much overhe= ad on an average one would see? Or is it even worth worrying about?
--047d7b1634bf5627c904bc072097--