[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18796?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]
Caleb Rackliffe updated CASSANDRA-18796:
----------------------------------------
Description:
With LCS, we will have potentially thousands of SSTables for a given user
table. Storage-attached also means SSTable-attached, and searching thousands of
attached indexes is not going to scale well at all locally, due to the sheer
number of searches and amount of postings list merging involved. We should have
a guardrail to prohibit this by default.
Partition-restricted queries, the use-case SAI is broadly designed for, should
be very efficient.
UPDATE: The consensus from the discussion below is that we'll add two
guardrails here. One is simply for whether we'll allow non-partition-restricted
2i queries.
was:
With LCS, we will have potentially thousands of SSTables for a given user
table. Storage-attached also means SSTable-attached, and searching thousands of
attached indexes is not going to scale well at all locally, due to the sheer
number of searches and amount of postings list merging involved. We should have
a guardrail to prohibit this by default.
Partition-restricted queries, the use-case SAI is broadly designed for, should
be very efficient.
> Optionally fail when a non-partition-restricted query is issued against a
> storage-attached index with a backing table using LCS
> -------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-18796
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-18796
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Feature/2i Index, Feature/SAI, Local/Compaction/LCS
> Reporter: Caleb Rackliffe
> Assignee: Stefan Miklosovic
> Priority: Normal
> Fix For: 5.0-rc, 5.x
>
> Time Spent: 2h 40m
> Remaining Estimate: 0h
>
> With LCS, we will have potentially thousands of SSTables for a given user
> table. Storage-attached also means SSTable-attached, and searching thousands
> of attached indexes is not going to scale well at all locally, due to the
> sheer number of searches and amount of postings list merging involved. We
> should have a guardrail to prohibit this by default.
> Partition-restricted queries, the use-case SAI is broadly designed for,
> should be very efficient.
> UPDATE: The consensus from the discussion below is that we'll add two
> guardrails here. One is simply for whether we'll allow
> non-partition-restricted 2i queries.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.20.10#820010)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
