[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16048?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17197025#comment-17197025
]
Jordan West commented on CASSANDRA-16048:
-----------------------------------------
[~ifesdjeen] thanks! I see the extra step necessary to produce the difference
(my test basically validates the row is still gone but doesn't test subsequent
deletes). I'll have to think about that in the context of this change a bit
more. The test in the branch and the one I linked also shows its safe
(excluding this delete case I need to dig into more) to have mixed schema
(during agreement).
> Safely Ignore Compact Storage Tables Where Users Have Defined Clustering and
> Value Columns
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-16048
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16048
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Legacy/CQL
> Reporter: Jordan West
> Assignee: Jordan West
> Priority: Normal
> Fix For: 4.0-beta
>
>
> Some compact storage tables, specifically those where the user has defined
> both at least one clustering and the value column, can be safely handled in
> 4.0 because besides the DENSE flag they are not materially different post 3.0
> and there is no visible change to the user facing schema after dropping
> compact storage. We can detect this case and allow these tables to silently
> drop the DENSE flag while still throwing a start-up error for COMPACT STORAGE
> tables that don’t meet the criteria.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@cassandra.apache.org
