Guys, this is beginning to sound like MUMPS!
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/MUMPS
In MUMPS, all variables are sparse, multidimensional arrays, which can be
stored to disk.
It is an arcane, and archaic, language (does anyone but me remember it?),
but it has been used successfully for years. Maybe we
Hi
What is the expected release date for 0.7 and what will be the feature
specifications for it ?
___
Vineet Daniel
___
Let your email find you
My comment on this post:
"This is an interesting start to performance testing these systems,
but raises many more questions than it answers. I am disappointed you
chose not to investigate the enormous, unexplained spreads in
performance for either system tested, nor to attempt to adjust tuning
par
I have a column family for sorting time-uuid and expect to retrieve columns
in descending order (i.e. latest on the top). but the following get_slice
call returns column in ascending order. Does cassandra sort time-uuid
column in descending order by default? Should get_slice call return the most
r
I was thinking it was going to be a lot more than that, you might want to
consider just storing them all as a single serialized array of timestamps
and uuids. By my math, you could fit up to 40 uuid/timestamp pairs for
under 1K. Then you'd just store something like this:
// Row key is userId
123
That is a good question, because realistically I see N being under 10, and
there are no current plans to make use of a large historical record. I could
have the update process pull all columns and issue deletes as necessary such
that only M (M >= N) are kept.
Thanks for the inspiration.
On Ma
Sorry, missed that. I'm not sure if there's a cleaner way than using the
approaches you've looked at, hopefully someone else has an answer. How big
is N and do you need to keep more than N around?
On Sat, May 8, 2010 at 10:26 AM, William Ashley wrote:
> This would be a solution if I wanted to
You're right, it should be private. But... I don't think it is worth opening a
ticket for.
-Original Message-
From: "Eben Hewitt"
Sent: Saturday, May 8, 2010 11:37am
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: AntiEntropyService Singleton
Hi Everyone
Thanks for your all of your terrific work
This would be a solution if I wanted to get the N most recently CREATED guids,
but I'm interested in the most recently SEEN guids.
On May 8, 2010, at 10:00 AM, Ed Anuff wrote:
> Is there a reason you can't use time-based guids? Those would be sorted the
> way you wanted.
>
> On Fri, May 7, 20
Is there a reason you can't use time-based guids? Those would be sorted the
way you wanted.
On Fri, May 7, 2010 at 8:31 PM, William Ashley wrote:
>
> Hopefully I’ve sufficiently explained what I’m trying to do. Now on to
> solving this problem in Cassandra. I’ve been trying to find a way that
>
Hi Everyone
Thanks for your all of your terrific work. I have a question about
org/apache/cassandra/service/AntiEntropyService.java. It's declared as a
Singleton with this line and comment:
// singleton enforcement
public static final AntiEntropyService instance = new
AntiEntropyService();
B
I'm not aware of any performance implications of this.
2010/5/7 王一锋 :
> Hi everyone,
>
> Can anyone throw a light at the
> benefits of using framed transport over non-framed transport?
>
> We are trying to sum up some performance tuning approaches of cassandra in
> our project.
> Can framed transp
Daniel,
Partitioning applies to row keys, not column sorting. You could take both of my
Cassandra solutions and refactor them to use row keys containing userId:time or
userId:guid, but you ultimately wind up with the same compromises on update or
retrieval efficiency, plus then you have to use a
13 matches
Mail list logo
