[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8430?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14240125#comment-14240125
]
Andrew Garrett commented on CASSANDRA-8430:
-------------------------------------------
[~philipthompson] Sure, the schema in my original question is one such schema.
{code}
create table test(
pk text primary key,
foo bigint,
bar text
);
{code}
You'll have to forgive me for the confusing claim, but I wasn't able to
re-establish a case where just setting everything to null without involving
TTLs deleted a row. I may have been simply running into race conditions a few
days ago when I was testing this. However, I do have some examples of weird
behavior that I just reproduced now:
{code}
insert into test (pk, foo, bar) values ('abc', 2, 'whatever') using ttl 60;
update test set foo=null where pk='abc';
{code}
Now at first the row has 'abc', 2, 'whatever', then after the update it has
'abc', 0, 'whatever'. Then after 60 seconds the row gets deleted. Same thing if
you set bar to null, doesn't matter which. You can set both to null at the same
time and it will have the same effect. However, if you set foo to 0 instead of
null, the row doesn't get deleted, despite them having the same values.
Another strange case is when I do the following:
{code}
update test set bar='whatever' where pk='xyz';
update test set bar=null where pk='xyz';
{code}
After the first statement the row is present with 'xyz', 0, 'whatever'. After
the second statement the row gets deleted. I am also confused about the
difference between "insert" and "update" here. The following is valid and
inserts a row with all nulls:
{code}
insert into test (pk, foo, bar) values ('allnulls', null, null);
{code}
But this doesn't add a row:
{code}
update test set foo=null, bar=null where k='allnulls';
{code}
Yet I know that if I use "update" to set non-null values it will add a row. It
seems there's a difference between insert and update but I thought they were
the same thing behind the scenes.
I spent last Thursday and Friday digging through a lot of different cases and
I've lost track of all of the unexpected behaviors, and I may have gotten
confused, but hopefully you can shed some light on these cases.
> Updating a row that has a TTL produce unexpected results
> --------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-8430
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8430
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Alan Boudreault
> Labels: cassandra, ttl
> Fix For: 2.0.11, 2.1.2, 3.0
>
> Attachments: test.sh
>
>
> Reported on stackoverflow:
> http://stackoverflow.com/questions/27280407/cassandra-ttl-gets-set-to-0-on-primary-key-if-no-ttl-is-specified-on-an-update?newreg=19e8c6757c62474985fef7c3037e8c08
> I can reproduce the issue with 2.0, 2.1 and trunk. I've attached a small
> script to reproduce the issue with CCM, and here is it's output:
> {code}
> aboudreault@kovarro:~/dev/cstar/so27280407$ ./test.sh
> Current cluster is now: local
> Insert data with a 5 sec TTL
> INSERT INTO ks.tbl (pk, foo, bar) values (1, 1, 'test') using TTL 5;
> pk | bar | foo
> ----+------+-----
> 1 | test | 1
> (1 rows)
> Update data with no TTL
> UPDATE ks.tbl set bar='change' where pk=1;
> sleep 6 sec
> BUG: Row should be deleted now, but isn't. and foo column has been deleted???
> pk | bar | foo
> ----+--------+------
> 1 | change | null
> (1 rows)
> Insert data with a 5 sec TTL
> INSERT INTO ks.tbl (pk, foo, bar) values (1, 1, 'test') using TTL 5;
> pk | bar | foo
> ----+------+-----
> 1 | test | 1
> (1 rows)
> Update data with a higher (10) TTL
> UPDATE ks.tbl USING TTL 10 set bar='change' where pk=1;
> sleep 6 sec
> BUG: foo column has been deleted?
> pk | bar | foo
> ----+--------+------
> 1 | change | null
> (1 rows)
> sleep 5 sec
> Data is deleted now after the second TTL set during the update. Is this a bug
> or the expected behavior?
> (0 rows)
> {code}
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
