[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1034?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13017638#comment-13017638
]
Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-1034:
-------------------------------------------
bq. RP.toSplitValue() returns for a given token the value that splits the
range: for a token range it's the token itself, but for a DK range, it's the
largest DK having this token. The null keys is related: even though we don't
mix DK and token in range, we need to be able to have a range of DK that
includes everything from x token to y token
This feels messy and error-prone to me. I wonder if we haven't found the right
approach yet.
> Remove assumption that Key to Token is one-to-one
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-1034
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1034
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Stu Hood
> Assignee: Sylvain Lebresne
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 0.8
>
> Attachments: 0001-Generify-AbstractBounds.patch,
> 0001-Make-range-accept-both-Token-and-DecoratedKey.patch,
> 0002-LengthPartitioner.patch,
> 0002-Remove-assumption-that-token-and-keys-are-one-to-one-v2.patch,
> 0002-Remove-assumption-that-token-and-keys-are-one-to-one.patch, 1034_v1.txt
>
>
> get_range_slices assumes that Tokens do not collide and converts a KeyRange
> to an AbstractBounds. For RandomPartitioner, this assumption isn't safe, and
> would lead to a very weird heisenberg.
> Converting AbstractBounds to use a DecoratedKey would solve this, because the
> byte[] key portion of the DecoratedKey can act as a tiebreaker.
> Alternatively, we could make DecoratedKey extend Token, and then use
> DecoratedKeys in places where collisions are unacceptable.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
