[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11538?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15245276#comment-15245276
]
Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-11538:
----------------------------------------------
Two points:
* I genuinely don't understand what you're suggesting. What do you think is
inconsistent here and how do you suggest it is fixed?
* Changing how index are stored internally comes with backward compatibility
issues, so even leaving my first point aside, if the change doesn't really fix
anything nor simplify significantly the code, I'm not sure we want to bother.
> Give secondary index on partition column the same treatment as static column
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-11538
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11538
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: CQL
> Environment: Cassandra 3.4
> Reporter: DOAN DuyHai
> Priority: Minor
>
> For index on static column, in the index table we store:
> - partition key = base table static column value
> - clustering = base table complete partition key (as a single value)
> The way we handle index on partition column is different, we store:
> - partition key = base table partition column value
> - clustering 1 = base table complete partition key (as a single value)
> - clustering 2 ... N+1 = N clustering values of the base table
> It is more consistent to give partition column index the same treatment as
> the one for static column
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
