[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5357?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13775972#comment-13775972
]
Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-5357:
-------------------------------------------
bq. its not that bad to deserialize the filters at least in the stress tests i
did
I think you may be testing the wrong thing. Specifically, you have to
deserialize the filters (and the CF, as a unit!) even on a *miss*. So the cost
is quite high vs having live filters.
bq. instead of de-serializing the whole column family at once we can
de-serialize it during filter in CFS.filterColumnFamily
Okay, I get that. I'm not concerned about that so much as, do we keep within
our total memory budget? If we have a 2GB cache and your query/queries make us
use 1GB of that on a single CF object, that is painful but acceptable. But if
we disregard our budget and collect a 3GB CF, that's unacceptable.
> Query cache
> -----------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-5357
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5357
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
> Assignee: Vijay
>
> I think that most people expect the row cache to act like a query cache,
> because that's a reasonable model. Caching the entire partition is, in
> retrospect, not really reasonable, so it's not surprising that it catches
> people off guard, especially given the confusion we've inflicted on ourselves
> as to what a "row" constitutes.
> I propose replacing it with a true query cache.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
