FWIW I would first try to reduce the number of columns, before reducing their
name length. If you always pull back the same columns (e.g. User details)
consider packing them in json dict and storing them in one column.
Aaron
On 12/02/2011, at 5:22 AM, Chris Burroughs wrote:
> On 02/11/2011 05
On 02/11/2011 05:06 AM, Patrik Modesto wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I'm thinking if size of a column name could matter for a large dataset
> in Cassandra (I mean lots of rows). For example what if I have a row
> with 10 columns each has 10 bytes value and 10 bytes name. Do I have
> half the row size just
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 2:06 AM, Patrik Modesto
wrote:
> Hi all!
>
> I'm thinking if size of a column name could matter for a large dataset
> in Cassandra (I mean lots of rows). For example what if I have a row
> with 10 columns each has 10 bytes value and 10 bytes name. Do I have
> half the row
r-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Column-name-size-tp6015127p6016109.html
Sent from the cassandra-u...@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at
Nabble.com.
Would be interested in your findings, Patrik! ...
I too was searching for something similar a few days back.. for column
names that contained userIds of users on my application. UUIDs that
seemed to be most widely recognized(perhaps!) solution are 16 bytes
but those definitely seem like a too muc
Hi all!
I'm thinking if size of a column name could matter for a large dataset
in Cassandra (I mean lots of rows). For example what if I have a row
with 10 columns each has 10 bytes value and 10 bytes name. Do I have
half the row size just of the column names and the other half of the
data (not c
