incubator-cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Green, John M (HP Education)" <>
Subject RE: Naive question about orphan rows
Date Wed, 26 Feb 2014 15:32:32 GMT

Thanks for your insight.

One other thought I had was to store a reference count with the "song".  When the last "playlist"
referencing the "song" is deleted the "song" will also be deleted because the reference count
decrements to zero.   However, this would create some nastiness when it comes to reliably
maintaining reference counts.   I'm not sure if it would help to split the reference count
into two monotonically increasing counters (number of references added, and number of references

In my case, users cannot browse a repository of "songs" to build a playlist from scratch.
 They can only import "songs" themselves or create references to "songs" other users have
explicitly made available to them.  Once a "song" is not referred to by any "playlist" it
will never be re-discovered so it should be deleted.   This could be done in some sort of
background data maintenance job that runs periodically.   Even if it is a low-priority background
job it look like it will create a lot overhead (scanning and producing counts).

From: Edward Capriolo []
Sent: Wednesday, February 26, 2014 5:56 AM
Subject: Re: Naive question about orphan rows

It is probably ok to have redundant songs in playlists, cassandra is about denormalization.

Dealing with this issue is going to be hard since the only way to dwal with this would be
scanning through the firsr cf and procing counts then using that information to delete in
the second table. However that information can change rapidly and then will fall out of sink

The only ways yo handle this are

1) never delete songs
2) store copies of songs ib playlist

On Friday, February 21, 2014, Green, John M (HP Education) <<>>
> I'm very much a newbie so this may be a silly question but ...
> I have a situation similar to the music service example (
of songs and playlists.  However, in my case, the "songs" would be considered orphans that
should be deleted when no "playlists" refer to them.  Relational databases have mechanisms
to manage this relationship so that a "song" could be deleted as soon as the last "playlist"
referencing it is deleted.    While I do NOT need to manage this as an atomic transaction,
I'm wondering what is the best way to delete orphaned rows (i.e., "songs" not referenced by
any "playlists")  using Cassandra.
> I guess an alternative approach would be to store "songs" directly in the "playlists"
but this could lead to many redundant copies of the same "song" which is something I'm hoping
to avoid.  I'm my case the "playlists" could have thousands of entries and the "songs" might
be blobs of 10s of Mbytes.    Maybe I'm just having a hard time abandoning my relational roots?
> John

Sorry this was sent from mobile. Will do less grammar and spell check than usual.

View raw message