[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-223?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12722753#action_12722753
]
Jun Rao commented on CASSANDRA-223:
-----------------------------------
Well, as for SSTable compaction, we probably can learn from Lucene. Overall,
Lucene tries to keep on the order of log(n) index segments, where n is the
total number of segments generated. It does that by keeping merging index
segments (up to a merging factor) of about the same size. The current
compaction code in cassandra seems to try to do that too. It's worth revisiting
it though.
> time-based slicing does not work correctly w/ "historial" memtables
> -------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-223
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-223
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
> Attachments: 223.patch
>
>
> TimeFilter assumes that it is done as soon as it finds a column stamped
> earlier than what it is filtering on, but when you have a group of
> "historical" memtables whose columns were written in an arbitrary order this
> is not a safe assumption.
> It is not even a safe assumption when dealing with a single memtable +
> sstable pair, as the attached new test shows.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
