[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7047?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13974765#comment-13974765
]
Sergio Bossa commented on CASSANDRA-7047:
-----------------------------------------
So, a couple of comments:
1) You changed the semantics of counter mutations triggers: while previously it
was possible to apply triggers on counters provided they didn't generate extra
mutations, now it is not (as you paired the CounterMutation instanceof check
with a direct exception).
2) You make semantic side effects on the input mutations by always grouping
them in case of triggers (the other reason I kept them separate).
3) The computational complexity is higher because of repeated use of map
get/put.
In the end, I have a slight preference for my version (with your IMutation
fix), or I think at least point #1 above should be addressed, unless
intentional?
> TriggerExecutor should group mutations by row key
> -------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-7047
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7047
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Core
> Reporter: Sergio Bossa
> Assignee: Sergio Bossa
> Attachments: 7047-v2.txt, 7047-v3.txt, CASSANDRA-7047.patch
>
>
> TriggerExecutor doesn't currently group mutations returned by triggers even
> if belonging to the same row key: while harmful per se (at least, I think
> so), this is definitely a performance problem, because each mutation is a
> *cluster* mutation, generating more network traffic, more disk IO and more
> index calls (if present).
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
