[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1207?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Jonathan Ellis updated CASSANDRA-1207:
--------------------------------------
Fix Version/s: 0.7.1
(was: 0.8)
After thinking about this (and writing CASSANDRA-1338) I think the automatic
approach is better than having users specify something in the CF definition. I
do think we need some testing to find out what the right threshold is, though.
> 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: 0.7.1
>
> 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.
