Hello Yuan
Correct, the first timestamp and values should be retained. I realise this is does not align with the current design. I was just asking whether there was an existing option to operate to block duplicates. In a normal RDBMS if you try to insert with a duplicate the insert will fail with a PK violation. It would be great in some circumstances if IotDB at least had the option to fail this way. I am considering some options such as; 1. Checking before insert if the timestamp already exists and remedy on the client before resend 2. Moving to Nanosecond and introducing some insignificant time value to keep timestamp values unique. I have already done something similar to #2 with storing IIS web log files as they are recorded in seconds and not milliseconds. Thanks Trevor Hart ---- On Tue, 14 May 2024 13:29:02 +1200 Yuan Tian <jackietie...@gmail.com> wrote --- Hi Trevor, By "rejects duplicates", you mean you want to keep the first duplicate timestamp and its corresponding values?(because the following duplicated ones will be rejected) Best regards, -------------------- Yuan Tian On Mon, May 13, 2024 at 6:24 PM Trevor Hart <mailto:tre...@ope.nz> wrote: > > > > > Correct. I’m not disputing that. What I’m asking is that it > would be good to have a configuration that either allows overwrites or > rejects duplicates.My scenario is request log data from a server (the > device). As it may be processing multiple requests at once there is a > chance that there could be colliding time stamps.As it stands now I would > need to check if the timestamp exists before inserting the data. Which > obviously affects throughput. Thanks Trevor Hart ---- On Fri, 10 May > 2024 00:33:40 +1200 Jialin Qiao<mailto:qiaojia...@apache.org> wrote ---- Hi, > In IoT or IIoT scenarios, we thought each data point represent a metric of > a timestamp.In which case you need to store duplicated values? Take this > for an example: Time, root.sg1.car1.speed 1, 1 1, 2 Could a car has > different speed at time 1? Jialin Qiao Yuan Tian < > mailto:jackietie...@gmail.com> 于2024年5月9日周四 18:51写道： > > Hi Trevor, > > Now > we > will override the duplicate timestamp with a newer one. There is > nothing > we can do about it now. > > Best regards, > ------------------- > Yuan Tian > > > On Wed, May 8, 2024 at 5:31 PM Trevor Hart <mailto:tre...@ope.nz> wrote: > > > > > > > Hello > > > > > > > > I’m aware that when inserting a duplicate timestamp > the values will be > > overwritten. This will obviously result in data > loss. > > > > > > > > Is there a config/setting to reject or throw an error > on duplicate > > inserts? Although highly unlikely I would prefer to be > alerted to the > > situation rather than lose data. > > > > > > > > I read > through the documentation but couldn’t find anything. > > > > > > > > > Thanks > > > > Trevor Hart > > > > > > >
