[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2565?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15501271#comment-15501271
]
Advertising
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)
