[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12884330#action_12884330
]
Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-1207:
-------------------------------------------
I think a better solution would be to allow optionally annotating a
ColumnFamily with metadata={bloomfilter,index,both} with both the default.
(this could be changed at runtime, and next compaction we would generate
whatever was requested).
because typically you will have "original data" CFs whose columns are either
accessed by name (you want a BF, index is unnecessary) or all at once (you
don't need either), and "relationship/index" CFs whose columns are accessed by
range (you want an index, BF is unnecessary).
> Don't write BloomFilters for skinny rows
> ----------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-1207
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1207
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Stu Hood
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 0.7
>
> Attachments:
> 0001-Return-alwaysMatchingBloomFilter-for-0-length-filter.patch,
> 0002-Conditionally-write-the-row-bloom-filter.patch
>
>
> All rows currently contain a serialized BloomFilter, regardless of size. For
> smaller rows, it is much more efficient in space and CPU time to not write a
> BloomFilter, and to eagerly perform lookups against the existing columns.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
