[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10571?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14976473#comment-14976473
]
Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-10571:
----------------------------------------------
I'll note that the patch from CASSANDRA-10572 moves counters read to the
"collect all data" path which does use {{shouldInclude}}, making this not a
regression for counters anymore. For that reason, I'd personally have a small
preference for pushing this to 3.2 (there is enough scary changes going on last
minute before 3.0 GA as is). But anyway, a fix for this is
[here|https://github.com/pcmanus/cassandra/commits/10571] (the patch is rebased
on top of the one from CASSANDRA-10572).
> ClusteringIndexNamesFilter::shouldInclude is not implemented,
> SinglePartitionNamesCommand not discarding the sstables it could
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-10571
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10571
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Aleksey Yeschenko
> Assignee: Sylvain Lebresne
> Fix For: 3.0.0
>
>
> Now that we use {{SinglePartitionNamesCommand}} in more places - where we'd
> previously use what is now {{SinglePartitionSliceCommand}} - not being able
> to skip sstables with non-overlapping clusterings is actually a performance
> regression.
> {{SinglePartitionNamesCommand::queryMemtableAndDiskInternal}} should prune
> sstables based on {{ClusteringIndexNamesFilter::shouldInclude}} output, and
> the latter must be replaced with an actual implementation instead of a
> {{TODO}}.
> This is also a potentially a big regression in performance for counter writes
> (say, with DTCS), since before 3.0, the read-before-write code would use
> {{collectAllData}}, and that *was* pruning sstable with non-overlapping
> clusterings.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
