Thanks David and Jonathan!
@David
Yes rows doesn't have a name, I'm just using the word name for anything,
like cluster name,
table name, row name etc, that is my bad.
Yes, I did change two things, that was probably stupid, but the reason for
the second change
is space efficiency.
You are totall
Generally, you want to have different types of data in different CFs
so you can tune them separately (key / row caches).
Mixing different row types in one CF also makes doing get_slice_range
scans difficult.
On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 12:04 PM, Erik Holstad wrote:
> What are the benefits of using mu
On 2010-03-05 18:30, David Strauss wrote:
> On 2010-03-05 18:04, Erik Holstad wrote:
>> So you can either have
>> ColumnFamilyFrom:userTo:{userFrom->messageid}
>> ColumnFamilyTo:userFrom:{userTo->messageid}
>>
>> or something like
>> ColumnFamily:user_to:{user1_messageId, user2_messageId}
>> Column
On 2010-03-05 18:04, Erik Holstad wrote:
> What are the benefits of using multiple ColumnFamilies compared to using
> a composite row name?
Just for terminology's sake, I'll note that rows have keys, not names.
Only columns and supercolumns have names.
I'm not the top expert here by any means, bu
What are the benefits of using multiple ColumnFamilies compared to using a
composite
row name?
Example: You have messages that you want to index on sent and to.
So you can either have
ColumnFamilyFrom:userTo:{userFrom->messageid}
ColumnFamilyTo:userFrom:{userTo->messageid}
or something like
Colu
