[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1599?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12919700#action_12919700
]
Stu Hood edited comment on CASSANDRA-1599 at 10/10/10 11:20 PM:
----------------------------------------------------------------
Another issue with local indexes is that implementing sorting would involve a
clusterwide merge sort. A distributed index is required to efficiently return
the data in index order. I think this issue should be delayed for 0.8.0 when we
have distributed indexes available: the indexes available in 0.7.0 are intended
for filtering data.
As a multi-part solution, (imo) we should:
# (optionally) Rename local indexes to "filter_indexes" or "filters"
# Expose 0.8.0 distributed indexes as readonly column families which are
sorted by the index value, and which are queried using get_range_slices
# Implement LT/LTE/GT/GTE operations for the key-range in get_range_slices
Outcomes:
* Your "primary" index expression would be consistently queried using the
"range" parameter in get_range_slices and would define the sort order
* "filters" (0.7.0 secondary indexes) would be applied using the IndexClause
argument as described on CASSANDRA-1600
I'm going to open another ticket to suggest some changes to index definitions
to make this consistent.
was (Author: stuhood):
Another issue with local indexes is that implementing sorting would involve
a clusterwide merge sort. A distributed index is required to efficiently return
the data in index order. I think this issue should be delayed for 0.8.0 when we
have distributed indexes available: the indexes available in 0.7.0 are intended
for filtering data.
As a multi-part solution, (imo) we should:
# (optionally) Rename local indexes to "filter_indexes" or "filters"
# Expose 0.8.0 distributed indexes as readonly column families which are
sorted by the index value, and which are queried using get_range_slices
# Implement LT/LTE/GT/GTE operations for the key-range in get_range_slices
Outcomes:
* Your "primary" index expression would be consistently queried using the
"range" parameter in get_range_slices and would define the sort order
* "filters" (0.7.0 secondary indexes) would be applied using the IndexClause
argument as described on CASSANDRA-1600
I'm going to open another ticket to suggest some changes to index definitions
to make this consistent.
> Add sort/order support for secondary indexing
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-1599
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1599
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: API
> Reporter: Todd Nine
> Fix For: 0.8
>
>
> For a lot of users paging is a standard use case on many web applications.
> It would be nice to allow paging as part of a Boolean Expression.
> Page -> start index
> -> end index
> -> page timestamp
> -> Sort Order
> When sorting, is it possible to sort both ASC and DESC?
>
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
