[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10374?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15037583#comment-15037583
]
Fabrizio Bottino commented on CASSANDRA-10374:
----------------------------------------------
Is there an EASY way to prevent v1/v2 clients acces to values bigger than 64K
so it's safe to release this in 2.1/2.2 without side effects ?
For example: we have implemented a table that is needing about 200KB per value
with this bug in mind and assuming (probably bad idea) that this bug would have
been fixed soon in 2.1/2.2 as stated in Fix Versions.
I assume 3.0 would not be declared stable very soon, so we are waiting for this
fix
> List and Map values incorrectly limited to 64k size
> ---------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-10374
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10374
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Tyler Hobbs
> Assignee: Benjamin Lerer
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0.1, 3.1, 2.1.x, 2.2.x
>
>
> With the v3 native protocol, we switched from encoding collection element
> sizes with shorts to ints. However, in {{Lists.java}} and {{Maps.java}}, we
> still validate that list and map values are smaller than
> {{MAX_UNSIGNED_SHORT}}.
> Map keys and set elements are stored in the cell name, so they're implicitly
> limited to the cell name size limit of 64k. However, for non-frozen
> collections, this limitation should not apply, so we probably don't want to
> perform this check here for those either.
> The fix should include tests where we exceed the 64k limit for frozen and
> non-frozen collections. In the case of non-frozen lists and maps, we should
> verify that the 64k cell-name size limit is enforced in a friendly way.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
