The query which does not work should be like this, I made a mistake there
cqlsh> SELECT * from my_keyspace.my_table where number > 2;
InvalidRequest: Error from server: code=2200 [Invalid query]
message="Cannot execute this query as it might involve data filtering and
thus may have unpredictable performance. If you want to execute this query
despite the performance unpredictability, use ALLOW FILTERING"
On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 at 10:10, Stefan Miklosovic <
stefan.mikloso...@instaclustr.com> wrote:
> Hi Leena,
>
> "We are thinking of creating a new table with a date field as a
> clustering column to be able to query for date ranges, but partition key to
> clustering key will be 1-1. Is this a good approach?"
>
> If you want to select by some time range here, I am wondering how would
> making datetime a clustering column help you here? You still have to
> provide primary key, right?
>
> E.g. select * from your_keyspace.your_table where id=123 and my_date >
> yesterday and my_date < tomorrow (you got the idea)
>
> If you make my_date clustering column, you cant not do this below, because
> you still have to specify partition key fully and then clustering key
> (optionally) where you can further order and do ranges. But you cant do a
> query without specifying partition key. Well, you can use ALLOW FILTERING
> but you do not want to do this at all in your situation as it would scan
> everything.
>
> select * from your_keyspace.your_table where my_date > yesterday and
> my_date < tomorrow
>
> cqlsh> create KEYSPACE my_keyspace WITH replication = {'class':
> 'NetworkTopologyStrategy', 'dc1': '1'};
> cqlsh> CREATE TABLE my_keyspace.my_table (id uuid, number int, PRIMARY KEY
> ((id), number));
>
> cqlsh> SELECT * from my_keyspace.my_table ;
>
> id | number
> --------------------------------------+--------
> 6e23f79a-8b67-47e0-b8e0-50be78bb1c7f | 3
> abdc0184-a695-427d-b63b-57cdf7a45f00 | 1
> 90fe112e-0f74-4cbc-8767-67bdc9c8c3b0 | 4
> 8cff3eb7-1aff-4dc7-9969-60190c7e4675 | 2
>
> cqlsh> SELECT * from my_keyspace.my_table where id =
> '6e23f79a-8b67-47e0-b8e0-50be78bb1c7f' and number > 2;
> InvalidRequest: Error from server: code=2200 [Invalid query]
> message="Invalid STRING constant (6e23f79a-8b67-47e0-b8e0-50be78bb1c7f) for
> "id" of type uuid"
>
> cqlsh> SELECT * from my_keyspace.my_table where id =
> 6e23f79a-8b67-47e0-b8e0-50be78bb1c7f and number > 2;
>
> id | number
> --------------------------------------+--------
> 6e23f79a-8b67-47e0-b8e0-50be78bb1c7f | 3
>
> You could remodel your data in such way that you would make primary key
> like this
>
> ((date), hour-minute, id)
>
> or
>
> ((date, hour-minute), id)
>
> I would prefer the second one because if you expect a lot of data per day,
> they would all end up on same set of replicas as hash of partition key
> would be same whole day if you have same date all day so I think you would
> end up with hotspots. You want to have your data spread more evenly so the
> second one seems to be better to me.
>
> You can also investigate how to do this with materialized view but I am
> not sure about the performance here.
>
> If you want to copy data you can do this e.g. by Cassandra Spark
> connector, you would just read table and as you read it you would write to
> another one. That is imho the fastest approach and the least error prone.
> You can do that on live production data and you can just make a "switch"
> afterwards. Not sure about ttls but that should be transparent while
> copying that.
>
> On Tue, 12 Mar 2019 at 03:04, Leena Ghatpande <lghatpa...@hotmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> We have a table with over 70M rows with a partition key that is unique. We
>> have a created datetime stamp on each record, and we have a need to
>> select all rows created for a date range. Secondary index is not an option
>> as its high cardinality and could slow performance doing a full scan on 70M
>> rows.
>>
>>
>> We are thinking of creating a new table with a date field as a clustering
>> column to be able to query for date ranges, but partition key to clustering
>> key will be 1-1. Is this a good approach?
>>
>> To do this, we need to copy this large volume of data from table1 to
>> table2 within the same cluster, while updates are still happening to
>> table1. We need to do this real time without impacting our customers. COPY
>> is not an option, as we have ttl's on each row on table1 that need to be
>> applied to table2 as well.
>>
>>
>> So what would be the best approach
>>
>> 1. To be able select data using date range without impacting
>> performance. This operation will be needed only on adhoc basis and it wont
>> be as frequent .
>> 2. Best way to migrate large volume of data with ttl from one table
>> to another within the same cluster.
>>
>>
>> Any other suggestions also will be greatly appreciated.
>>
>>
>>
>
> Stefan Miklosovic
>
Stefan Miklosovic
