Wait... Why would anything require ALLOW FILTERING if the partition key is defined? That seems to contradict documentation: https://cassandra.apache.org/doc/latest/cassandra/cql/dml.html#allow-filtering
Also my intuition / expectation matches what the manual says. henrik On Fri, Apr 7, 2023 at 12:01 AM Jeremy Hanna <jeremy.hanna1...@gmail.com> wrote: > Considering all of the examples require using ALLOW FILTERING with the > partition key specified, I think it's appropriate to consider separating > out use of ALLOW FILTERING within a partition versus ALLOW FILTERING across > the whole table. A few years back we had a discussion about this in ASF > slack in the context of capability restrictions and it seems relevant > here. That is, we don't want people to get comfortable using ALLOW > FILTERING across the whole table. However, there are times when ALLOW > FILTERING within a partition is reasonable. > > Ticket to discuss separating them out: > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-15803 > Summary: Perhaps add an optional [WITHIN PARTITION] or something similar > to make it backwards compatible and indicate that this is purely within the > specified partition. > > This also gives us the ability to disallow table scan types of ALLOW > FILTERING from a guard rail perspective, because the intent is explicit. > That operators could disallow ALLOW FILTERING but allow ALLOW FILTERING > WITHIN PARTITION, or whatever is decided. > > I do NOT want to hijack a good discussion but I thought this separation > could be useful within this context. > > Jeremy > > On Apr 6, 2023, at 3:00 PM, Patrick McFadin <pmcfa...@gmail.com> wrote: > > I love that this is finally coming to Cassandra. Absolutely hate that, > once again, we'll be endorsing the use of ALLOW FILTERING. This is an > anti-pattern that keeps getting legitimized. > > Hot take: Should we just not do Milestones 1 and 2 and wait for an > index-only Milestone 3? > > Patrick > > On Thu, Apr 6, 2023 at 10:04 AM David Capwell <dcapw...@apple.com> wrote: > >> Overall I welcome this feature, was trying to use this around 1-2 months >> back and found we didn’t support, so glad to see it coming! >> >> From a testing point of view, I think we would want to have good fuzz >> testing covering complex types (frozen/non-frozen collections, tuples, udt, >> etc.), and reverse ordering; both sections tend to cause the most problem >> for new features (and existing ones) >> >> We also will want a way to disable this feature, and optionally disable >> at different sections (such as m2’s NOT IN for partition keys). >> >> > On Apr 4, 2023, at 2:28 AM, Piotr Kołaczkowski <pkola...@datastax.com> >> wrote: >> > >> > Hi everyone! >> > >> > I created a new CEP for adding NOT support to the query language and >> > want to start discussion around it: >> > >> https://cwiki.apache.org/confluence/display/CASSANDRA/CEP-29%3A+CQL+NOT+operator >> > >> > Happy to get your feedback. >> > -- >> > Piotr >> >> > -- Henrik Ingo c. +358 40 569 7354 w. www.datastax.com <https://www.facebook.com/datastax> <https://twitter.com/datastax> <https://www.linkedin.com/company/datastax/> <https://github.com/datastax/>