[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2143?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15069779#comment-15069779
]
James Taylor commented on PHOENIX-2143:
---------------------------------------
bq. but if we still keep the GuidePostInfo per cf, then how we will distribute
the rowcount and bytecount to the guidePosts or still these metrics are needed
at cf level?
We'll continue to keep these metrics per cf as that's how we use them for
parallelization on the client side.
bq. As we are keeping regionname as another column in stats, so we need to
update the region name for the quigeposts after split ,right?
No, remove the regionname column as we won't need it.
bq. We still can delete the rows by using the region column
Even if we weren't removing the regionname column, we'd still want to do the
delete the way I indicated as it'll prevent a full table scan.
> Use guidepost bytes instead of region name in stats primary key
> ---------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-2143
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2143
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Sub-task
> Reporter: James Taylor
> Assignee: Ankit Singhal
> Attachments: PHOENIX-2143_wip.patch
>
>
> Our current SYSTEM.STATS table uses the region name as the last column in the
> primary key constraint. Instead, we should use the MIN_KEY column (which
> corresponds to the region start key). The advantage would be that the stats
> would then be ordered by region start key allowing us to approximate the
> number of guideposts which would be traversed given the start/stop row of a
> scan:
> {code}
> SELECT SUM(guide_posts_count) FROM SYSTEM.STATS WHERE min_key > :1 AND
> min_key < :2
> {code}
> where :1 is the start row and :2 is the stop row of the scan. With an UNNEST
> operator for ARRAYs, we could get a better approximation.
> As part of the upgrade to the new Phoenix version containing this fix, stats
> could simply be dropped and they'd be recalculated with the new schema.
> An alternative, even more granular approach would be to *not* use arrays to
> store the guide posts, but instead store them as individual rows with a
> schema like this.
> |PHYSICAL_NAME|VARCHAR|
> |COLUMN_FAMILY|VARCHAR|
> |GUIDE_POST_KEY|VARBINARY|
> In this alternative, the maintenance during compaction is higher, though, as
> you'd need to run a separate query to do the deletion of the old guideposts,
> followed by a commit of the new guideposts. The other disadvantage (besides
> requiring multiple queries) is that this couldn't be done transactionally.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
