[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8927?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14220262#comment-14220262
]
stack commented on HBASE-8927:
------------------------------
bq. Should we pick this up again?
I like this issue. Hard part is ensuring we don't break TTLs going between old
and new ts types (as you pointed out above). Was thinking we'd have all
timestamping go via the environmentedge thingy... would add a compare on it.
It would do the ttl math cognizant of the ts typing (my guess is that left
shift would be less expensive doing this compare than multiply but would have
to measure).
bq. We'd probably need to add a "timestamp multiplier" or "timestamp shift"
option to table or column family. That way we can grandfather in old tables and
in all cases scale the TTL value accordingly.
All or nothing I'd say Just say NO to more options (smile).
> Use nano time instead of mili time everywhere
> ---------------------------------------------
>
> Key: HBASE-8927
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/HBASE-8927
> Project: HBase
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: stack
> Labels: phoenix
> Attachments: 8927.txt
>
>
> Less collisions and we are paying the price of a long anyways so might as
> well fill it.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
