[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2565?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15501271#comment-15501271 ]
James Taylor commented on PHOENIX-2565: --------------------------------------- Also, more of a note to [~samarthjain], but upon further thinking, encoded columns will work fine for transactional tables, so any special cases around those should be removed: {code} public static boolean setMinMaxQualifiersOnScan(PTable table) { - return EncodedColumnsUtil.usesEncodedColumnNames(table) && !table.isTransactional() && !hasDynamicColumns(table); + return table.getStorageScheme() != null && table.getStorageScheme() == StorageScheme.ENCODED_COLUMN_NAMES + && !table.isTransactional() && !hasDynamicColumns(table); {code} > Store data for immutable tables in single KeyValue > -------------------------------------------------- > > Key: PHOENIX-2565 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2565 > Project: Phoenix > Issue Type: Improvement > Reporter: James Taylor > Assignee: Thomas D'Silva > Fix For: 4.9.0 > > Attachments: PHOENIX-2565-wip.patch, PHOENIX-2565.patch > > > Since an immutable table (i.e. declared with IMMUTABLE_ROWS=true) will never > update a column value, it'd be more efficient to store all column values for > a row in a single KeyValue. We could use the existing format we have for > variable length arrays. > For backward compatibility, we'd need to support the current mechanism. Also, > you'd no longer be allowed to transition an existing table to/from being > immutable. I think the best approach would be to introduce a new IMMUTABLE > keyword and use it like this: > {code} > CREATE IMMUTABLE TABLE ... > {code} -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)