Is there a unit test exposing this behavior? And what does "reversible transformation" mean?
On Wed, May 1, 2013 at 8:36 PM, Adam Fuchs <[email protected]> wrote: > For all the rest of you on this thread, the big problem you'll run into > when returning keys out of range is that the reseeking behavior will skip a > bunch of underlying keys (i.e. don't try this at home). For example, say > you have tablets ["A","D"], ("D","M"], and ("M","ZZZZ..."]. If you do a > query on ["A","M"] and return "N" after seeing the underlying key "A", you > may never see keys from the ("D","M"] tablet. A good rule of thumb is to > return keys in the same row as the underlying keys that were used to > generate them and use a reversible transformation of columns within each > row. > >
