Why do you need another CF? Is there something wrong with repeating the key
as a column and indexing it?
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 7:40 PM, Patrick Julien wrote:
> Exactly. In any case, I just answered my own question. If I need
> range, I can just make another column family where the column nam
Exactly. In any case, I just answered my own question. If I need
range, I can just make another column family where the column name are
these keys
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 12:37 PM, Nate McCall wrote:
>> yes,but why would you use CompositeType if you don't need range query?
>
> If you were doing
> yes,but why would you use CompositeType if you don't need range query?
If you were doing composite keys anyway (common approach with time
series data for example), you would not have to write parsing and
concatenation code. Particularly useful if you had mixed types in the
key.
On 22/07/2011 17:56, Patrick Julien wrote:
I can still use it for keys if I don't need ranges then? Because for
what we are doing we can always re-assemble keys
yes,but why would you use CompositeType if you don't need range query?
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Donal Zang wrote:
If you a
I can still use it for keys if I don't need ranges then? Because for
what we are doing we can always re-assemble keys
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 11:38 AM, Donal Zang wrote:
> If you are using OPP, then you can use CompositeType on both key and column
> name; otherwise(Random Partition), just use it
If you are using OPP, then you can use CompositeType on both key and
column name; otherwise(Random Partition), just use it for columns.
On 22/07/2011 17:10, Patrick Julien wrote:
With the current implementation of CompositeType in Cassandra 0.8.1,
is it recommended practice to try to use a Compo
With the current implementation of CompositeType in Cassandra 0.8.1,
is it recommended practice to try to use a CompositeType as the key?
Or are both, column and key, equally well supported?
The documentation on CompositeType is light, well non-existent really, with
key_validation_class set to Co
