The table was created this way, we also avoid altering exiting tables.
On Tue, Jan 21, 2014 at 4:19 PM, Jacob Rhoden <jacob.rho...@me.com> wrote: > Was the original table created, or created then altered? It makes a > difference as I have seen this type of thing occur on tables I first > created then updated. Not sure if that issue was fixed in 2.0.4, I'm > avoiding altering tables completely for now. > > ______________________________ > Sent from iPhone > > On 22 Jan 2014, at 7:50 am, Brian Tarbox <tar...@cabotresearch.com> wrote: > > We're trying to use CompositeTypes and Secondary indexes and are getting > an assertion failure in ExtendedFilter.java line 258 (running C* 2.0.3) > when we call getIndexedColumns. The assertion is for not finding any > columns. > > The strange bit is that if we re-create the column family in question and > do *not *set ComparatorType then things work fine. This seems odd since > as I understand it the ComparatorType is for controlling the ordering of > columns within a row and the Secondary Index is to find a subset of rows > that contain a particular column value....in other words they seem like > they shouldn't have an interaction. > > Its also puzzling to us that ExtendedFilter asserts in this case...if it > find no columns I would have expected an empty return but not a failure > (that our client code saw as a Timeout exception). > > Any clues would be appreciated. > > Thanks, > > Brian Tarbox > >
