Re: Minimal 4.0 COMPACT STORAGE backport

+1 to this, and my immediate concern is the possibility that the patch I'm working on for CASSANDRA-16226 will actually require information about whether a table was *created* with COMPACT STORAGE. On Thu, Oct 22, 2020 at 2:41 PM David Capwel

Re: Minimal 4.0 COMPACT STORAGE backport

Thanks for the reply. Talked with Alex in Slack and I was under the impression deleted rows were handled differently on read. collect ideas about migration, cutoff date and final deprecation in a > separate thread or a document. +1 I am good bringing a subset back to ease upgrades to 4.0 On

Re: Minimal 4.0 COMPACT STORAGE backport

These are some great (albeit somewhat hard) questions! > * when you drop compact storage and have some SSTables stored in compact storage and some SSTables stored normally, how do we present data correctly? There is no difference in SSTable format between normal and compact storage, the differenc

Re: Minimal 4.0 COMPACT STORAGE backport

Definitely that is not off the table. Also, we talked this morning for a plan for additional testing to be created as part of CASSANDRA-15588 On Thu, 22 Oct 2020 at 12:33, David Capwell wrote: > I am in favor of bringing it back, but I do feel we should also plan how to > get it removed as well.

Re: Minimal 4.0 COMPACT STORAGE backport

I am in favor of bringing it back, but I do feel we should also plan how to get it removed as well. Few examples, would love to see fleshed out * when you drop compact storage and have some SSTables stored in compact storage and some SSTables stored normally, how do we present data correctly? * d

Re: Minimal 4.0 COMPACT STORAGE backport

Hi Alex, Thanks for bringing this up. I am with you for returning part of the code back and considering this as a bug. I truly believe it is too late in the release to document changed behavior. I think this contradicts with the project’s promise for no breaking changes. This should have been docum

Minimal 4.0 COMPACT STORAGE backport

Since this is an important subject, I thought it also makes sense to start a mailing list thread. You may know that in 4.0 there was a plan to drop compact storage and related code. However, there are several behavioural changes related to compact storage, and difference in visible behaviour betwe