This is a great example of why calling columns "columns" is confusing.
Evan On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 3:04 PM, Evan Weaver<[email protected]> wrote: > No...I'm talking about column-oriented schemas in the BigTable sense. > It's unrelated to Cassandra's "columns". > > When a business object spans multiple column families, it can be > considered "column-oriented" because same fields are stored physically > close on disk despite being from different keys. It's similar to a > projection in a relational column store. > > Evan > > On Fri, Aug 21, 2009 at 2:49 PM, Sandeep Tata<[email protected]> wrote: >> Evan, >> >>> PS. The implementation of column families hasn't changed from >>> BigTable, but the use in modeling has. Common Cassandra designs are >>> more row-oriented than column-oriented. >> >> I'm not sure I understand the distinction you're drawing between >> row-oriented modeling and column-oriented modeling. >> Are you talking about row-oriented modeling as placing entire objects >> in a column (today's nomenclature) and treating a cassandra column >> like a database row? >> >> Sandeep >> > > > > -- > Evan Weaver > -- Evan Weaver
