> It's part of the mindset shift you have to go through coming from a database >world to a NoSQL world
This is useful. If you have more insights like this Ian and care to share them, I think we would be really interested to hear them. Best regards, - Andy Problems worthy of attack prove their worth by hitting back. - Piet Hein (via Tom White) >________________________________ >From: Ian Varley <ivar...@salesforce.com> >To: "user@hbase.apache.org" <user@hbase.apache.org> >Sent: Sunday, August 14, 2011 8:36 AM >Subject: Re: TTL for cell values > >"I am slightly confused now. Time to live is used in networking , after n >hops drop this packet. Also used I'm memcache , expire this data n seconds >after insert. I do not know of any specific ttl features in rdbms so I do not >understand >why someone would expect ttl to he permanently durable." > >Edward, my mistake was originally assuming that the TTL applied only to *old* >versions of a cell (I.e. not the most recent one). It was a misunderstanding >on my part, based on the fact that there *are* no TTL features in an RDBMS >(you only get rid of the current value by issuing an explicit delete). > >HBase is light years ahead of an RDBMS in the way it explicitly handles the >time dimension; I just wasn't expecting this facet of that behavior. It's part >of the mindset shift you have to go through coming from a database world to a >NoSQL world; you can treat parts of your store as a transient cache if you >want to (which is useful in all kinds of situations). Just needed to expand my >brain to consider that ... :) > >Ian > > >On Aug 14, 2011, at 7:30 AM, "Edward Capriolo" ><edlinuxg...@gmail.com<mailto:edlinuxg...@gmail.com>> wrote: > >I am slightly confused now. Time to live is used in networking , after n >hops drop this packet. Also used I'm memcache , expire this data n seconds >after insert. > >I do not know of any specific ttl features in rdbms so I do not understand >why someone would expect ttl to he permanently durable. > > >
