Ok. I agree that i am pointing to same table location but those are two different tables.
If i am querying one of them then only data corresponding to that table should return, isnt it? Also, in second case, even after removing that table, how come the data from that table is returned? Thanks, Ameya On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:05 PM, Tim Williams <[email protected]> wrote: > On Thu, Aug 7, 2014 at 3:01 PM, Ameya Aware <[email protected]> wrote: > > Ok.. list didnt return anything because there were no tables present. > > > > I have another query. > > > > *blur (default)> create -t test -c 10 -l test* > > *blur (default)> mutate test r1 rid1 f1 c1:v1* > > *blur (default)> query test ** > > > > *1 results found in [223.357074 ms]. Row [1] Record [1] Column [1] Data > > (bytes) [8]* > > *result# rowid recordid f1.c1* > > *0 r1 rid1 v1 * > > > > > > Until this point it is working fine. > > > > *blur (default)> create -t testable -c 10 -l test* > > *blur (default)> mutate testable r2 rid2 f2 c2:f2* > > *blur (default)> query testable ** > > > > > > *2 results found in [36.109771 ms]. Row [2] Record [2] Column [2] Data > > (bytes) [16]* > > *result# rowid recordid * > > *0 r2 f2.c2* > > *0 rid2 f2 * > > *1 r1 f1.c1* > > *1 rid1 v1 * > > > > Now when i am querying table testable why it is returning 2 results (One > > row from test table) even though it has only one record? > > > > *blur (default)> disable test* > > *blur (default)> remove test* > > *blur (default)> query testable ** > > > > > > *2 results found in [43.491442 ms]. Row [2] Record [2] Column [2] Data > > (bytes) [16]* > > *result# rowid recordid * > > *0 r2 f2.c2* > > *0 rid2 f2 * > > *1 r1 f1.c1* > > *1 rid1 v1 * > > > > Here even after removing test table, it still returns 2 results , one > from > > test and one from testable tables. > > > > What is wrong here?? Why is this residual data keep coming? > > Because you keep pointing to the same table location on disk? Are you > sure the "-l" (that's a lowercase L, btw) flag is pointing to two > *different* locations? It's a nice feature of Blur to be able to > define two tables pointing to the same location but I see now that is > probably a potential for confusion. > > --tim >
