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:
     public static boolean setMinMaxQualifiersOnScan(PTable table) {
-        return EncodedColumnsUtil.usesEncodedColumnNames(table) && 
!table.isTransactional() && !hasDynamicColumns(table);
+        return table.getStorageScheme() != null && table.getStorageScheme() == 
+                       && !table.isTransactional() && 

> 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}
> {code}

This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA

Reply via email to