Thanks for reporting the problem.
I will look into it.

Regards,

Benjamin

On Sun, Feb 21, 2016 at 3:19 PM, Luis Ángel Vicente Sánchez <
langel.gro...@gmail.com> wrote:

> I think I have found an issue when you have a simple column family with a
> simple primary key (no clustering keys) and you use the IN clause. This
> problem only happens with Cassandra 3.x, in Cassandra 2.x works just fine.
>
> You can reproduce this issue by checking out this project:
>
> https://github.com/lvicentesanchez/cassandra-3.x-error
>
> It's written in Scala but I have provided instructions on how to run the
> program.
>
> I will copy here the content of README.md where I explain the problem:
>
> # cassandra-3.x-error #
>
> This repository reproduces an error in Cassandra 3.x when the fetch size is
> smaller than the number of rows in a column family. For the shake of this
> demo, fetch size would be 2 and the number of rows 3.
>
> ## Pre-steps ##
>
> 1. Use `src/main/cql/script.cql` to create the key space and column
> families.
> 2. Modify contact point and port in `src/main/scala/CassandraError.scala`.
> 3. Modify contact point and port in `src/main/scala/CassandraOk.scala`.
> 4. Open `sbt` by executing `./sbt` in the root of the project.
>
> ## Error ##
>
> Execute `runMain CassandraError`. We would get this in our terminal:
>
> ```
> [info] Measure(1,11)
> [info] Measure(2,7)
> [info] Measure(2,7)
> [info] Measure(3,23)
> [info] Measure(3,23)
> ```
>
> If we run the same program against Cassandra 2.x, we would get this:
>
> ```
> [info] Measure(1,11)
> [info] Measure(2,7)
> [info] Measure(3,23)
> ```
>
> We were expecting Cassandra 3.x to produce the same output as Cassandra
> 2.x. It seems that there is an issue with simple primary keys, pagination
> and the IN clause.
>
> ## Ok ##
>
> Execute `runMain CassandraOk`. Whether we ran it against Cassandra 2.x or
> Cassandra 3.x, we would get this in our terminal:
>
> ```
> [info] Measure(1,0,11)
> [info] Measure(2,0,7)
> [info] Measure(3,0,23)
> ```
>
> Should I create an issue?
>
> Regards,
>
> Luis
>

Reply via email to