[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3681?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15937770#comment-15937770
]
Rajeshbabu Chintaguntla edited comment on PHOENIX-3681 at 3/23/17 5:47 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
[~lhofhansl] [~jamestaylor] [~sergey.soldatov] Some times users may create 10's
of indexes because writes are cheaper with local indexes so having that many
column families may not be good idea right. To avoid the overhead of dropping
local indexes we can follow alternative way like we can drop the meta data of
local indexes so that that particular index won't be usable. In the background
during compaction we can skip writing that particular index data. We can
utilise the skip scan filters to avoid the overhead during the compactions as
well. We can set the index ids as the slots to skip reading the deleted
indexes. It's in my priority list as well. PHOENIX-3566 is the issue raised for
that. Wdyt?
was (Author: rajeshbabu):
[~lhofhansl] [~jamestaylor] [~sergey.soldatov] Some times users may create 10's
of indexes because writes are cheaper with local indexes so having that many
column families may not be good idea right. To avoid the overhead of dropping
local indexes we can follow alternative way like we can drop the meta data of
local indexes so that that particular index won't be usable. In the background
during compaction we can skip writing that particular index data. We can
utilise the skip scan filters to avoid the overhead during the compactions as
well. We can set the index ids as the slots to skip reading the deleted
indexes. It's in my priority list as well. Wdyt?
> Store local indexes in a column family per index
> ------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: PHOENIX-3681
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-3681
> Project: Phoenix
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Lars Hofhansl
>
> Currently all local indexes are stored in a single column family. That makes
> maintenance (such as dropping an index) more expensive than necessary.
> Let's have each local index in its own column family (or be able to declare
> which column family an index should go into).
> As [~jamestaylor] points out, this won't work for indexes on views as there
> might be 1000's of them.
> Another issue are covered local indexes, but I'd argue that local indexes
> would benefit little from being covered. (that also needs to be
> experimentally verified)
> Local indexes in individual column families would be great to isolate any
> maintenance and even usage from each other.
> [~rajeshbabu], [~mujtabachohan]
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)
