[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7855?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14117360#comment-14117360 ]
Jack Krupansky commented on CASSANDRA-7855: ------------------------------------------- bq. not necessary a better idea than parallelizing queries server side Server side? Or should that be CLIENT side? Typo: "necessary" s.b. "necessarily". And later in the description "give" s.b. "given". And earlier in the description "later" s.b. "latter". And even earlier, "compount" s.b. "compound" and "only support to have a IN" s.b. "only support an IN". > Genralize use of IN for compound partition keys > ----------------------------------------------- > > Key: CASSANDRA-7855 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7855 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Bug > Reporter: Sylvain Lebresne > Priority: Minor > Labels: cql > Fix For: 2.0.11 > > > When you have a compount partition key, we currently only support to have a > {{IN}} on the last column of that partition key. So given: > {noformat} > CREATE TABLE foo ( > k1 int, > k2 int, > v int, > PRIMARY KEY ((k1, k2)) > ) > {noformat} > we allow > {noformat} > SELECT * FROM foo WHERE k1 = 0 AND k2 IN (1, 2) > {noformat} > but not > {noformat} > SELECT * FROM foo WHERE k1 IN (0, 1) AND k2 IN (1, 2) > {noformat} > There is no particular reason for us not supporting the later (to the best of > my knowledge) since it's reasonably straighforward, so we should fix it. > I'll note that using {{IN}} on a partition key is not necessary a better idea > than parallelizing queries server side so this syntax, when introduced, > should probably be used sparingly, but give we do support IN on partition > keys, I see no reason not to extend it to compound PK properly. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)