Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Matope Ono]

Thank you DuyHai.
I was in two minds about large partitions for my app.
I thought upgrading to 3.x would be good and easy option. But now I'm going
to work on refactoring my data model :)

2016-10-15 20:38 GMT+09:00 DuyHai Doan :

> Yes, more or less. The 100Mb is a rule of thumb. No one will blame you for
> storing 200Mb for example. The figure is just given as an example of order
> of magnitude
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> you mean 100MB (MegaBytes)? Also the data in each of my column is about
>> 1KB so in that case the optimal size 100K columns (since 100K * 1KB =
>> 100MB) right?
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 4:26 AM, DuyHai Doan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?"
>>>
>>> --> Usual recommendations for Cassandra 2.1 are:
>>>
>>> a. max 100Mb per partition size
>>> b. or up to 10 000 000 physical columns for a partition (including
>>> clustering columns etc ...)
>>>
>>> Recently, with the work of Robert Stupp (CASSANDRA-11206) and also with
>>> the huge enhancement from Michael Kjellman (CASSANDRA-9754) it will be
>>> easier to handle huge partition in memory, especially with a reduce memory
>>> footprint with regards to the JVM heap.
>>>
>>> However, as long as we don't have repair and streaming processes that
>>> can be "resumed" in a middle of a partition, the operational pains will
>>> still be there. Same for compaction
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 1) It will be great if someone can confirm that there is no limit
 2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?

 Finally, Thanks a lot for pointing out all the operational issues!

 On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 2:39 AM, DuyHai Doan 
 wrote:

> "But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?"
>
> --> I remember some one the committer saying that this 2B columns
> limitation comes from the Thrift era where you're limited to max  2B
> columns to be returned to the client for each request. It also applies to
> the max size of each "page" of data
>
> Since the introduction of the binary protocol and the paging feature,
> this limitation does not make sense anymore.
>
> By the way, if your partition is too wide, you'll face other
> operational issues way before reaching the 2B columns limit:
>
> - compaction taking long time --> heap pressure --> long GC pauses
> --> nodes flapping
> - repair & over-streaming, repair session failure in the middle that
> forces you to re-send the whole big partition --> the receiving node has a
> bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
> - bootstrapping of new nodes --> failure to stream a partition in the
> middle will force to re-send the whole partition from the beginning again 
> -->
> the receiving node has a bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on 
> compaction
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Kant Kodali 
> wrote:
>
>>  compacting 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition in what
>> duration?
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Matope Ono 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Please forget the part in my sentence.
>>> For more correctly, maybe I should have said like "He could compact
>>> 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition".
>>> What I wanted to say is we can store much more rows(and columns) in
>>> a partition than before 3.6.
>>>
>>> 2016-10-15 15:34 GMT+09:00 Kant Kodali :
>>>
 "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
 presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too
 not only columns??

 If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10
 partitions (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of 
 size
 15GB. (thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data 
 of
 size 1KB).

 On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali 
 wrote:

> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too
> not only columns??
>
> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10
> partitions (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition 
> of size
> 15GB. (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a 
> data of
> size 1KB).
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much 

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[DuyHai Doan]

Yes, more or less. The 100Mb is a rule of thumb. No one will blame you for
storing 200Mb for example. The figure is just given as an example of order
of magnitude

On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> you mean 100MB (MegaBytes)? Also the data in each of my column is about
> 1KB so in that case the optimal size 100K columns (since 100K * 1KB =
> 100MB) right?
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 4:26 AM, DuyHai Doan  wrote:
>
>> "2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?"
>>
>> --> Usual recommendations for Cassandra 2.1 are:
>>
>> a. max 100Mb per partition size
>> b. or up to 10 000 000 physical columns for a partition (including
>> clustering columns etc ...)
>>
>> Recently, with the work of Robert Stupp (CASSANDRA-11206) and also with
>> the huge enhancement from Michael Kjellman (CASSANDRA-9754) it will be
>> easier to handle huge partition in memory, especially with a reduce memory
>> footprint with regards to the JVM heap.
>>
>> However, as long as we don't have repair and streaming processes that can
>> be "resumed" in a middle of a partition, the operational pains will still
>> be there. Same for compaction
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> 1) It will be great if someone can confirm that there is no limit
>>> 2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?
>>>
>>> Finally, Thanks a lot for pointing out all the operational issues!
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 2:39 AM, DuyHai Doan 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 "But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?"

 --> I remember some one the committer saying that this 2B columns
 limitation comes from the Thrift era where you're limited to max  2B
 columns to be returned to the client for each request. It also applies to
 the max size of each "page" of data

 Since the introduction of the binary protocol and the paging feature,
 this limitation does not make sense anymore.

 By the way, if your partition is too wide, you'll face other
 operational issues way before reaching the 2B columns limit:

 - compaction taking long time --> heap pressure --> long GC pauses
 --> nodes flapping
 - repair & over-streaming, repair session failure in the middle that
 forces you to re-send the whole big partition --> the receiving node has a
 bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
 - bootstrapping of new nodes --> failure to stream a partition in the
 middle will force to re-send the whole partition from the beginning again 
 -->
 the receiving node has a bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction



 On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

>  compacting 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition in what
> duration?
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Matope Ono 
> wrote:
>
>> Please forget the part in my sentence.
>> For more correctly, maybe I should have said like "He could compact
>> 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition".
>> What I wanted to say is we can store much more rows(and columns) in a
>> partition than before 3.6.
>>
>> 2016-10-15 15:34 GMT+09:00 Kant Kodali :
>>
>>> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>>> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too
>>> not only columns??
>>>
>>> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10
>>> partitions (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of 
>>> size
>>> 15GB. (thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data 
>>> of
>>> size 1KB).
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
 presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too
 not only columns??

 If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10
 partitions (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of 
 size
 15GB. (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data 
 of
 size 1KB).





 On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono 
 wrote:

> Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger
> partition than before 3.6.
> (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
> presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)
>
> But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
> If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is.
> Could anyone let me know about it?

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Kant Kodali]

you mean 100MB (MegaBytes)? Also the data in each of my column is about 1KB
so in that case the optimal size 100K columns (since 100K * 1KB = 100MB)
right?

On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 4:26 AM, DuyHai Doan  wrote:

> "2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?"
>
> --> Usual recommendations for Cassandra 2.1 are:
>
> a. max 100Mb per partition size
> b. or up to 10 000 000 physical columns for a partition (including
> clustering columns etc ...)
>
> Recently, with the work of Robert Stupp (CASSANDRA-11206) and also with
> the huge enhancement from Michael Kjellman (CASSANDRA-9754) it will be
> easier to handle huge partition in memory, especially with a reduce memory
> footprint with regards to the JVM heap.
>
> However, as long as we don't have repair and streaming processes that can
> be "resumed" in a middle of a partition, the operational pains will still
> be there. Same for compaction
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> 1) It will be great if someone can confirm that there is no limit
>> 2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?
>>
>> Finally, Thanks a lot for pointing out all the operational issues!
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 2:39 AM, DuyHai Doan 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?"
>>>
>>> --> I remember some one the committer saying that this 2B columns
>>> limitation comes from the Thrift era where you're limited to max  2B
>>> columns to be returned to the client for each request. It also applies to
>>> the max size of each "page" of data
>>>
>>> Since the introduction of the binary protocol and the paging feature,
>>> this limitation does not make sense anymore.
>>>
>>> By the way, if your partition is too wide, you'll face other operational
>>> issues way before reaching the 2B columns limit:
>>>
>>> - compaction taking long time --> heap pressure --> long GC pauses
>>> --> nodes flapping
>>> - repair & over-streaming, repair session failure in the middle that
>>> forces you to re-send the whole big partition --> the receiving node has a
>>> bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
>>> - bootstrapping of new nodes --> failure to stream a partition in the
>>> middle will force to re-send the whole partition from the beginning again 
>>> -->
>>> the receiving node has a bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
  compacting 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition in what
 duration?

 On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Matope Ono 
 wrote:

> Please forget the part in my sentence.
> For more correctly, maybe I should have said like "He could compact 10
> sstables each of them have a 15GB partition".
> What I wanted to say is we can store much more rows(and columns) in a
> partition than before 3.6.
>
> 2016-10-15 15:34 GMT+09:00 Kant Kodali :
>
>> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not
>> only columns??
>>
>> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10
>> partitions (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of 
>> size
>> 15GB. (thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data of
>> size 1KB).
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>>> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too
>>> not only columns??
>>>
>>> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10
>>> partitions (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of 
>>> size
>>> 15GB. (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data 
>>> of
>>> size 1KB).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger
 partition than before 3.6.
 (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
 presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)

 But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
 If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is.
 Could anyone let me know about it?

 Thanks Yasuharu.


 2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :

> The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This
> statement seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed 
> story,
> in which a tech reporter embellished on a statement to 

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[DuyHai Doan]

"2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?"

--> Usual recommendations for Cassandra 2.1 are:

a. max 100Mb per partition size
b. or up to 10 000 000 physical columns for a partition (including
clustering columns etc ...)

Recently, with the work of Robert Stupp (CASSANDRA-11206) and also with the
huge enhancement from Michael Kjellman (CASSANDRA-9754) it will be easier
to handle huge partition in memory, especially with a reduce memory
footprint with regards to the JVM heap.

However, as long as we don't have repair and streaming processes that can
be "resumed" in a middle of a partition, the operational pains will still
be there. Same for compaction



On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 12:00 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> 1) It will be great if someone can confirm that there is no limit
> 2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?
>
> Finally, Thanks a lot for pointing out all the operational issues!
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 2:39 AM, DuyHai Doan  wrote:
>
>> "But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?"
>>
>> --> I remember some one the committer saying that this 2B columns
>> limitation comes from the Thrift era where you're limited to max  2B
>> columns to be returned to the client for each request. It also applies to
>> the max size of each "page" of data
>>
>> Since the introduction of the binary protocol and the paging feature,
>> this limitation does not make sense anymore.
>>
>> By the way, if your partition is too wide, you'll face other operational
>> issues way before reaching the 2B columns limit:
>>
>> - compaction taking long time --> heap pressure --> long GC pauses
>> --> nodes flapping
>> - repair & over-streaming, repair session failure in the middle that
>> forces you to re-send the whole big partition --> the receiving node has a
>> bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
>> - bootstrapping of new nodes --> failure to stream a partition in the
>> middle will force to re-send the whole partition from the beginning again -->
>> the receiving node has a bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
>>
>>
>>
>> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>>  compacting 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition in what
>>> duration?
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Matope Ono 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Please forget the part in my sentence.
 For more correctly, maybe I should have said like "He could compact 10
 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition".
 What I wanted to say is we can store much more rows(and columns) in a
 partition than before 3.6.

 2016-10-15 15:34 GMT+09:00 Kant Kodali :

> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not
> only columns??
>
> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
> (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
> (thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data of size
> 1KB).
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali 
> wrote:
>
>> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not
>> only columns??
>>
>> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10
>> partitions (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of 
>> size
>> 15GB. (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data of
>> size 1KB).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger partition
>>> than before 3.6.
>>> (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>>> presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)
>>>
>>> But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
>>> If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is.
>>> Could anyone let me know about it?
>>>
>>> Thanks Yasuharu.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :
>>>
 The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This
 statement seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed 
 story,
 in which a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy
 article.

 The effect is something like this:
 http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-ston
 es-and-the-study-that-never-existed/

 Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store
 rows with 2 billion columns! It is just not true.

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Kant Kodali]

1) It will be great if someone can confirm that there is no limit
2) so what is optimal limit in terms of data size?

Finally, Thanks a lot for pointing out all the operational issues!

On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 2:39 AM, DuyHai Doan  wrote:

> "But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?"
>
> --> I remember some one the committer saying that this 2B columns
> limitation comes from the Thrift era where you're limited to max  2B
> columns to be returned to the client for each request. It also applies to
> the max size of each "page" of data
>
> Since the introduction of the binary protocol and the paging feature, this
> limitation does not make sense anymore.
>
> By the way, if your partition is too wide, you'll face other operational
> issues way before reaching the 2B columns limit:
>
> - compaction taking long time --> heap pressure --> long GC pauses -->
> nodes flapping
> - repair & over-streaming, repair session failure in the middle that
> forces you to re-send the whole big partition --> the receiving node has a
> bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
> - bootstrapping of new nodes --> failure to stream a partition in the
> middle will force to re-send the whole partition from the beginning again -->
> the receiving node has a bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
>
>
>
> On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>>  compacting 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition in what
>> duration?
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Matope Ono 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Please forget the part in my sentence.
>>> For more correctly, maybe I should have said like "He could compact 10
>>> sstables each of them have a 15GB partition".
>>> What I wanted to say is we can store much more rows(and columns) in a
>>> partition than before 3.6.
>>>
>>> 2016-10-15 15:34 GMT+09:00 Kant Kodali :
>>>
 "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
 presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not
 only columns??

 If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
 (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
 (thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data of size
 1KB).

 On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali 
 wrote:

> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not
> only columns??
>
> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
> (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
> (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data of size
> 1KB).
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono 
> wrote:
>
>> Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger partition
>> than before 3.6.
>> (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>> presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)
>>
>> But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
>> If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is.
>> Could anyone let me know about it?
>>
>> Thanks Yasuharu.
>>
>>
>> 2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :
>>
>>> The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This
>>> statement seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed 
>>> story,
>>> in which a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy
>>> article.
>>>
>>> The effect is something like this:
>>> http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-ston
>>> es-and-the-study-that-never-existed/
>>>
>>> Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store rows
>>> with 2 billion columns! It is just not true.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Kant Kodali 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought
 this is an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere
 including the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that 
 bothered
 you for some reason.

 On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha <
 dorian.ho...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to
> multiple lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists
> rules).
> Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are
> separated.
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha <
> 

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[DuyHai Doan]

"But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?"

--> I remember some one the committer saying that this 2B columns
limitation comes from the Thrift era where you're limited to max  2B
columns to be returned to the client for each request. It also applies to
the max size of each "page" of data

Since the introduction of the binary protocol and the paging feature, this
limitation does not make sense anymore.

By the way, if your partition is too wide, you'll face other operational
issues way before reaching the 2B columns limit:

- compaction taking long time --> heap pressure --> long GC pauses -->
nodes flapping
- repair & over-streaming, repair session failure in the middle that forces
you to re-send the whole big partition --> the receiving node has a bunch
of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction
- bootstrapping of new nodes --> failure to stream a partition in the
middle will force to re-send the whole partition from the beginning again -->
the receiving node has a bunch of duplicate data --> pressure on compaction



On Sat, Oct 15, 2016 at 9:15 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

>  compacting 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition in what
> duration?
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Matope Ono  wrote:
>
>> Please forget the part in my sentence.
>> For more correctly, maybe I should have said like "He could compact 10
>> sstables each of them have a 15GB partition".
>> What I wanted to say is we can store much more rows(and columns) in a
>> partition than before 3.6.
>>
>> 2016-10-15 15:34 GMT+09:00 Kant Kodali :
>>
>>> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>>> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not
>>> only columns??
>>>
>>> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
>>> (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
>>> (thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data of size
>>> 1KB).
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
 presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not
 only columns??

 If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
 (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
 (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data of size
 1KB).





 On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono 
 wrote:

> Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger partition
> than before 3.6.
> (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
> presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)
>
> But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
> If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is.
> Could anyone let me know about it?
>
> Thanks Yasuharu.
>
>
> 2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :
>
>> The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This statement
>> seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed story, in 
>> which
>> a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy article.
>>
>> The effect is something like this:
>> http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-ston
>> es-and-the-study-that-never-existed/
>>
>> Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store rows
>> with 2 billion columns! It is just not true.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Kant Kodali 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought
>>> this is an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere
>>> including the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that 
>>> bothered
>>> you for some reason.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha <
>>> dorian.ho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to
 multiple lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists
 rules).
 Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are
 separated.

 On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha <
 dorian.ho...@gmail.com> wrote:

> There are some issues working on larger partitions.
> Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on
> hbase not to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, 
> you can
> easily sort between them and create small rows.
>
> In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say
> "globally 

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Kant Kodali]

 compacting 10 sstables each of them have a 15GB partition in what duration?

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:45 PM, Matope Ono  wrote:

> Please forget the part in my sentence.
> For more correctly, maybe I should have said like "He could compact 10
> sstables each of them have a 15GB partition".
> What I wanted to say is we can store much more rows(and columns) in a
> partition than before 3.6.
>
> 2016-10-15 15:34 GMT+09:00 Kant Kodali :
>
>> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his presentation"
>> This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not only columns??
>>
>> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
>> (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
>> (thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data of size
>> 1KB).
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>>> presentation" This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not
>>> only columns??
>>>
>>> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
>>> (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
>>> (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data of size
>>> 1KB).
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger partition
 than before 3.6.
 (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
 presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)

 But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
 If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is.
 Could anyone let me know about it?

 Thanks Yasuharu.


 2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :

> The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This statement
> seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed story, in which
> a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy article.
>
> The effect is something like this:
> http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-ston
> es-and-the-study-that-never-existed/
>
> Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store rows
> with 2 billion columns! It is just not true.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Kant Kodali 
> wrote:
>
>> Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought
>> this is an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere
>> including the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that 
>> bothered
>> you for some reason.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha > > wrote:
>>
>>> Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to
>>> multiple lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists
>>> rules).
>>> Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are
>>> separated.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha <
>>> dorian.ho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>
 There are some issues working on larger partitions.
 Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on
 hbase not to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, 
 you can
 easily sort between them and create small rows.

 In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say
 "globally sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use
 globally-sorted most of the time! You have to be careful though (just 
 like
 with random partition)

 Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there
 is a way.
 The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?

 On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali 
 wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition
> but in practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. 
> why
> not create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach 
> a safe
> limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment 
> bigint  as
> a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return 
> the new
> rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
> understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
> currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and 
> thinking
> about token ranges and 

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Matope Ono]

Please forget the part in my sentence.
For more correctly, maybe I should have said like "He could compact 10
sstables each of them have a 15GB partition".
What I wanted to say is we can store much more rows(and columns) in a
partition than before 3.6.

2016-10-15 15:34 GMT+09:00 Kant Kodali :

> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his presentation"
> This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not only columns??
>
> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
> (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
> (thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data of size
> 1KB).
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his presentation"
>> This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not only columns??
>>
>> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
>> (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
>> (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data of size
>> 1KB).
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono  wrote:
>>
>>> Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger partition
>>> than before 3.6.
>>> (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>>> presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)
>>>
>>> But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
>>> If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is. Could
>>> anyone let me know about it?
>>>
>>> Thanks Yasuharu.
>>>
>>>
>>> 2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :
>>>
 The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This statement
 seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed story, in which
 a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy article.

 The effect is something like this:
 http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-ston
 es-and-the-study-that-never-existed/

 Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store rows
 with 2 billion columns! It is just not true.






 On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought
> this is an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere
> including the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that 
> bothered
> you for some reason.
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
> wrote:
>
>> Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to
>> multiple lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists
>> rules).
>> Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are
>> separated.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha <
>> dorian.ho...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> There are some issues working on larger partitions.
>>> Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase
>>> not to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can
>>> easily sort between them and create small rows.
>>>
>>> In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say
>>> "globally sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use
>>> globally-sorted most of the time! You have to be careful though (just 
>>> like
>>> with random partition)
>>>
>>> Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there
>>> is a way.
>>> The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Hi All,

 I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition
 but in practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. 
 why
 not create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a 
 safe
 limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment 
 bigint  as
 a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the 
 new
 rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
 understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
 currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
 about token ranges and potentially many other things..

 My current problem is this

 I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time
 series data)
 and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit
 (or whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to 

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Kant Kodali]

"Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his presentation"
This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not only columns??

If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
(like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
(thats like 15 million columns where each column can have a data of size
1KB).

On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 11:30 PM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> "Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his presentation"
> This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not only columns??
>
> If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
> (like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
> (thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data of size
> 1KB).
>
>
>
>
>
> On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono  wrote:
>
>> Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger partition than
>> before 3.6.
>> (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his
>> presentation. https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)
>>
>> But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
>> If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is. Could
>> anyone let me know about it?
>>
>> Thanks Yasuharu.
>>
>>
>> 2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :
>>
>>> The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This statement
>>> seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed story, in which
>>> a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy article.
>>>
>>> The effect is something like this:
>>> http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-ston
>>> es-and-the-study-that-never-existed/
>>>
>>> Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store rows
>>> with 2 billion columns! It is just not true.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought
 this is an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere
 including the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that bothered
 you for some reason.

 On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
 wrote:

> Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to multiple
> lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists rules).
> Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are
> separated.
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha  > wrote:
>
>> There are some issues working on larger partitions.
>> Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase
>> not to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can
>> easily sort between them and create small rows.
>>
>> In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say "globally
>> sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use 
>> globally-sorted
>> most of the time! You have to be careful though (just like with random
>> partition)
>>
>> Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there
>> is a way.
>> The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition
>>> but in practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. 
>>> why
>>> not create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a 
>>> safe
>>> limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment bigint 
>>>  as
>>> a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the 
>>> new
>>> rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
>>> understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
>>> currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
>>> about token ranges and potentially many other things..
>>>
>>> My current problem is this
>>>
>>> I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time
>>> series data)
>>> and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit
>>> (or whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to break the 
>>> partition
>>> into level/pages
>>>
>>> rowkey1, page1->col1, col2, col3..
>>> rowkey1, page2->col1, col2, col3..
>>>
>>> now say my Cassandra db is populated with data and say my
>>> application just got booted up and I want to most recent value of a 
>>> certain
>>> partition but I don't know which page it belongs to since my application
>>> just got booted up? how do I solve 

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Kant Kodali]

"Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his presentation"
This sounds like there is there is a row limit too not only columns??

If I am reading this correctly 10 15GB partitions  means 10 partitions
(like 10 row keys,  thats too small) with each partition of size 15GB.
(thats like 10 million columns where each column can have a data of size
1KB).





On Fri, Oct 14, 2016 at 9:54 PM, Matope Ono  wrote:

> Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger partition than
> before 3.6.
> (Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his presentation.
> https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)
>
> But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
> If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is. Could
> anyone let me know about it?
>
> Thanks Yasuharu.
>
>
> 2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :
>
>> The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This statement
>> seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed story, in which
>> a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy article.
>>
>> The effect is something like this:
>> http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-ston
>> es-and-the-study-that-never-existed/
>>
>> Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store rows with
>> 2 billion columns! It is just not true.
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought this
>>> is an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere including
>>> the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that bothered you for
>>> some reason.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to multiple
 lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists rules).
 Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are separated.

 On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
 wrote:

> There are some issues working on larger partitions.
> Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase
> not to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can
> easily sort between them and create small rows.
>
> In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say "globally
> sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use globally-sorted
> most of the time! You have to be careful though (just like with random
> partition)
>
> Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there is
> a way.
> The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali 
> wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition
>> but in practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. why
>> not create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a 
>> safe
>> limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment bigint  
>> as
>> a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the 
>> new
>> rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
>> understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
>> currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
>> about token ranges and potentially many other things..
>>
>> My current problem is this
>>
>> I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time
>> series data)
>> and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit
>> (or whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to break the partition
>> into level/pages
>>
>> rowkey1, page1->col1, col2, col3..
>> rowkey1, page2->col1, col2, col3..
>>
>> now say my Cassandra db is populated with data and say my application
>> just got booted up and I want to most recent value of a certain partition
>> but I don't know which page it belongs to since my application just got
>> booted up? how do I solve this in the most efficient that is possible in
>> Cassandra today? I understand I can create MV, other tables that can hold
>> some auxiliary data such as number of pages per partition and so on..but
>> that involves the maintenance cost of that other table which I cannot
>> afford really because I have MV's, secondary indexes for other good
>> reasons. so it would be great if someone can explain the best way 
>> possible
>> as of today with Cassandra? By best way I mean is it possible with one
>> request? If Yes, then how? If not, then what is the next best way 

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Matope Ono]

Thanks to CASSANDRA-11206, I think we can have much larger partition than
before 3.6.
(Robert said he could treat safely 10 15GB partitions at his presentation.
https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=N3mGxgnUiRY)

But is there still 2B columns limit on the Cassandra code?
If so, out of curiosity, I'd like to know where the bottleneck is. Could
anyone let me know about it?

Thanks Yasuharu.

2016-10-13 1:11 GMT+09:00 Edward Capriolo :

> The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This statement
> seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed story, in which
> a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy article.
>
> The effect is something like this:
> http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-ston
> es-and-the-study-that-never-existed/
>
> Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store rows with
> 2 billion columns! It is just not true.
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought this
>> is an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere including
>> the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that bothered you for
>> some reason.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to multiple
>>> lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists rules).
>>> Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are separated.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
>>> wrote:
>>>
 There are some issues working on larger partitions.
 Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase
 not to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can
 easily sort between them and create small rows.

 In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say "globally
 sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use globally-sorted
 most of the time! You have to be careful though (just like with random
 partition)

 Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there is
 a way.
 The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?

 On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition but
> in practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. why not
> create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a safe
> limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment bigint  
> as
> a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the new
> rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
> understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
> currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
> about token ranges and potentially many other things..
>
> My current problem is this
>
> I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time series
> data)
> and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit
> (or whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to break the partition
> into level/pages
>
> rowkey1, page1->col1, col2, col3..
> rowkey1, page2->col1, col2, col3..
>
> now say my Cassandra db is populated with data and say my application
> just got booted up and I want to most recent value of a certain partition
> but I don't know which page it belongs to since my application just got
> booted up? how do I solve this in the most efficient that is possible in
> Cassandra today? I understand I can create MV, other tables that can hold
> some auxiliary data such as number of pages per partition and so on..but
> that involves the maintenance cost of that other table which I cannot
> afford really because I have MV's, secondary indexes for other good
> reasons. so it would be great if someone can explain the best way possible
> as of today with Cassandra? By best way I mean is it possible with one
> request? If Yes, then how? If not, then what is the next best way to solve
> this?
>
> Thanks,
> kant
>


>>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Edward Capriolo]

The "2 billion column limit" press clipping "puffery". This statement
seemingly became popular because highly traffic traffic-ed story, in which
a tech reporter embellished on a statement to make a splashy article.

The effect is something like this:
http://www.healthnewsreview.org/2012/08/iced-tea-kidney-stones-and-the-study-that-never-existed/

Iced tea does not cause kidney stones! Cassandra does not store rows with 2
billion columns! It is just not true.






On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 4:57 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought this
> is an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere including
> the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that bothered you for
> some reason.
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
> wrote:
>
>> Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to multiple
>> lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists rules).
>> Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are separated.
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
>> wrote:
>>
>>> There are some issues working on larger partitions.
>>> Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase not
>>> to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can easily
>>> sort between them and create small rows.
>>>
>>> In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say "globally
>>> sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use globally-sorted
>>> most of the time! You have to be careful though (just like with random
>>> partition)
>>>
>>> Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there is a
>>> way.
>>> The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>>
 Hi All,

 I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition but
 in practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. why not
 create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a safe
 limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment bigint  as
 a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the new
 rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
 understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
 currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
 about token ranges and potentially many other things..

 My current problem is this

 I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time series
 data)
 and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit (or
 whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to break the partition into
 level/pages

 rowkey1, page1->col1, col2, col3..
 rowkey1, page2->col1, col2, col3..

 now say my Cassandra db is populated with data and say my application
 just got booted up and I want to most recent value of a certain partition
 but I don't know which page it belongs to since my application just got
 booted up? how do I solve this in the most efficient that is possible in
 Cassandra today? I understand I can create MV, other tables that can hold
 some auxiliary data such as number of pages per partition and so on..but
 that involves the maintenance cost of that other table which I cannot
 afford really because I have MV's, secondary indexes for other good
 reasons. so it would be great if someone can explain the best way possible
 as of today with Cassandra? By best way I mean is it possible with one
 request? If Yes, then how? If not, then what is the next best way to solve
 this?

 Thanks,
 kant

>>>
>>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Kant Kodali]

Well 1) I have not sent it to postgresql mailing lists 2) I thought this is
an open ended question as it can involve ideas from everywhere including
the Cassandra java driver mailing lists so sorry If that bothered you for
some reason.

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:41 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
wrote:

> Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to multiple
> lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists rules).
> Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are separated.
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
> wrote:
>
>> There are some issues working on larger partitions.
>> Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase not
>> to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can easily
>> sort between them and create small rows.
>>
>> In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say "globally
>> sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use globally-sorted
>> most of the time! You have to be careful though (just like with random
>> partition)
>>
>> Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there is a
>> way.
>> The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?
>>
>> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>>
>>> Hi All,
>>>
>>> I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition but
>>> in practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. why not
>>> create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a safe
>>> limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment bigint  as
>>> a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the new
>>> rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
>>> understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
>>> currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
>>> about token ranges and potentially many other things..
>>>
>>> My current problem is this
>>>
>>> I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time series
>>> data)
>>> and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit (or
>>> whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to break the partition into
>>> level/pages
>>>
>>> rowkey1, page1->col1, col2, col3..
>>> rowkey1, page2->col1, col2, col3..
>>>
>>> now say my Cassandra db is populated with data and say my application
>>> just got booted up and I want to most recent value of a certain partition
>>> but I don't know which page it belongs to since my application just got
>>> booted up? how do I solve this in the most efficient that is possible in
>>> Cassandra today? I understand I can create MV, other tables that can hold
>>> some auxiliary data such as number of pages per partition and so on..but
>>> that involves the maintenance cost of that other table which I cannot
>>> afford really because I have MV's, secondary indexes for other good
>>> reasons. so it would be great if someone can explain the best way possible
>>> as of today with Cassandra? By best way I mean is it possible with one
>>> request? If Yes, then how? If not, then what is the next best way to solve
>>> this?
>>>
>>> Thanks,
>>> kant
>>>
>>
>>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Kant Kodali]

I did mention this in my previous email.  This is not time series data. I
understand how to structure it if it is a time series data/

What do you mean globally sorted? you mean keeping every partition sorted
(since I come from Casandra world)?

rowkey 1 -> blob
page -> int or long or bigint
col1  -> text
col2 -> blob
co3 -> bigint

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 1:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
wrote:

> There are some issues working on larger partitions.
> Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase not
> to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can easily
> sort between them and create small rows.
>
> In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say "globally
> sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use globally-sorted
> most of the time! You have to be careful though (just like with random
> partition)
>
> Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there is a
> way.
> The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition but in
>> practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. why not
>> create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a safe
>> limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment bigint  as
>> a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the new
>> rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
>> understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
>> currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
>> about token ranges and potentially many other things..
>>
>> My current problem is this
>>
>> I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time series
>> data)
>> and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit (or
>> whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to break the partition into
>> level/pages
>>
>> rowkey1, page1->col1, col2, col3..
>> rowkey1, page2->col1, col2, col3..
>>
>> now say my Cassandra db is populated with data and say my application
>> just got booted up and I want to most recent value of a certain partition
>> but I don't know which page it belongs to since my application just got
>> booted up? how do I solve this in the most efficient that is possible in
>> Cassandra today? I understand I can create MV, other tables that can hold
>> some auxiliary data such as number of pages per partition and so on..but
>> that involves the maintenance cost of that other table which I cannot
>> afford really because I have MV's, secondary indexes for other good
>> reasons. so it would be great if someone can explain the best way possible
>> as of today with Cassandra? By best way I mean is it possible with one
>> request? If Yes, then how? If not, then what is the next best way to solve
>> this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> kant
>>
>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Dorian Hoxha]

Also, I'm not sure, but I don't think it's "cool" to write to multiple
lists in the same message. (based on postgresql mailing lists rules).
Example I'm not subscribed to those, and now the messages are separated.

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 10:37 AM, Dorian Hoxha 
wrote:

> There are some issues working on larger partitions.
> Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase not
> to create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can easily
> sort between them and create small rows.
>
> In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say "globally
> sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use globally-sorted
> most of the time! You have to be careful though (just like with random
> partition)
>
> Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there is a
> way.
> The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?
>
> On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:
>
>> Hi All,
>>
>> I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition but in
>> practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. why not
>> create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a safe
>> limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment bigint  as
>> a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the new
>> rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
>> understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
>> currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
>> about token ranges and potentially many other things..
>>
>> My current problem is this
>>
>> I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time series
>> data)
>> and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit (or
>> whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to break the partition into
>> level/pages
>>
>> rowkey1, page1->col1, col2, col3..
>> rowkey1, page2->col1, col2, col3..
>>
>> now say my Cassandra db is populated with data and say my application
>> just got booted up and I want to most recent value of a certain partition
>> but I don't know which page it belongs to since my application just got
>> booted up? how do I solve this in the most efficient that is possible in
>> Cassandra today? I understand I can create MV, other tables that can hold
>> some auxiliary data such as number of pages per partition and so on..but
>> that involves the maintenance cost of that other table which I cannot
>> afford really because I have MV's, secondary indexes for other good
>> reasons. so it would be great if someone can explain the best way possible
>> as of today with Cassandra? By best way I mean is it possible with one
>> request? If Yes, then how? If not, then what is the next best way to solve
>> this?
>>
>> Thanks,
>> kant
>>
>
>

Re: Why does Cassandra need to have 2B column limit? why can't we have unlimited ?

[Dorian Hoxha]

There are some issues working on larger partitions.
Hbase doesn't do what you say! You have also to be carefull on hbase not to
create large rows! But since they are globally-sorted, you can easily sort
between them and create small rows.

In my opinion, cassandra people are wrong, in that they say "globally
sorted is the devil!" while all fb/google/etc actually use globally-sorted
most of the time! You have to be careful though (just like with random
partition)

Can you tell what rowkey1, page1, col(x) actually are ? Maybe there is a
way.
The most "recent", means there's a timestamp in there ?

On Wed, Oct 12, 2016 at 9:58 AM, Kant Kodali  wrote:

> Hi All,
>
> I understand Cassandra can have a maximum of 2B rows per partition but in
> practice some people seem to suggest the magic number is 100K. why not
> create another partition/rowkey automatically (whenever we reach a safe
> limit that  we consider would be efficient)  with auto increment bigint  as
> a suffix appended to the new rowkey? so that the driver can return the new
> rowkey  indicating that there is a new partition and so on...Now I
> understand this would involve allowing partial row key searches which
> currently Cassandra wouldn't do (but I believe HBASE does) and thinking
> about token ranges and potentially many other things..
>
> My current problem is this
>
> I have a row key followed by bunch of columns (this is not time series
> data)
> and these columns can grow to any number so since I have 100K limit (or
> whatever the number is. say some limit) I want to break the partition into
> level/pages
>
> rowkey1, page1->col1, col2, col3..
> rowkey1, page2->col1, col2, col3..
>
> now say my Cassandra db is populated with data and say my application just
> got booted up and I want to most recent value of a certain partition but I
> don't know which page it belongs to since my application just got booted
> up? how do I solve this in the most efficient that is possible in Cassandra
> today? I understand I can create MV, other tables that can hold some
> auxiliary data such as number of pages per partition and so on..but that
> involves the maintenance cost of that other table which I cannot afford
> really because I have MV's, secondary indexes for other good reasons. so it
> would be great if someone can explain the best way possible as of today
> with Cassandra? By best way I mean is it possible with one request? If Yes,
> then how? If not, then what is the next best way to solve this?
>
> Thanks,
> kant
>