[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10571?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14976473#comment-14976473 ]
Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-10571: ---------------------------------------------- I'll note that the patch from CASSANDRA-10572 moves counters read to the "collect all data" path which does use {{shouldInclude}}, making this not a regression for counters anymore. For that reason, I'd personally have a small preference for pushing this to 3.2 (there is enough scary changes going on last minute before 3.0 GA as is). But anyway, a fix for this is [here|https://github.com/pcmanus/cassandra/commits/10571] (the patch is rebased on top of the one from CASSANDRA-10572). > ClusteringIndexNamesFilter::shouldInclude is not implemented, > SinglePartitionNamesCommand not discarding the sstables it could > ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------ > > Key: CASSANDRA-10571 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10571 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Aleksey Yeschenko > Assignee: Sylvain Lebresne > Fix For: 3.0.0 > > > Now that we use {{SinglePartitionNamesCommand}} in more places - where we'd > previously use what is now {{SinglePartitionSliceCommand}} - not being able > to skip sstables with non-overlapping clusterings is actually a performance > regression. > {{SinglePartitionNamesCommand::queryMemtableAndDiskInternal}} should prune > sstables based on {{ClusteringIndexNamesFilter::shouldInclude}} output, and > the latter must be replaced with an actual implementation instead of a > {{TODO}}. > This is also a potentially a big regression in performance for counter writes > (say, with DTCS), since before 3.0, the read-before-write code would use > {{collectAllData}}, and that *was* pruning sstable with non-overlapping > clusterings. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)