Compact storage should really have been named "not wasteful storage" - now everything is "not wasteful storage" so it's void of meaning. This is true without constraint. You do not need to limit yourself to a single non-PK column; you can have many and it will remain as or more efficient than "compact storage"
On Mon, 11 Apr 2016 at 15:04, Jack Krupansky <jack.krupan...@gmail.com> wrote: > My understanding is Thrift is being removed from Cassandra in 4.0, but will > COMPACT STORAGE be removed as well? Clearly the two are related, but > COMPACT STORAGE had a performance advantage in addition to Thrift > compatibility, so its status is ambiguous. > > I recall vague chatter, but no explicit deprecation notice or 4.0 plan for > removal of COMPACT STORAGE. Actually, I don't even see a deprecation notice > for Thrift itself in CHANGES.txt. > > Will a table with only a single non-PK column automatically be implemented > at a comparable level of efficiency compared to the old/current Compact > STORAGE? That will still leave the question of how to migrate a non-Thrift > COMPACT STORAGE table (i.e., used for performance by a CQL-oriented > developer rather than Thrift compatibility per se) to pure CQL. > > -- Jack Krupansky >