Depending on your table schema, you'll probably want to translate an object graph into multiple mutations.
On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 8:40 PM, David Medinets <[email protected]>wrote: > If the sub-document changes, you'll need to search the values of every > Accumulo entry? > > > On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 5:31 PM, Geoffry Roberts > <[email protected]>wrote: > >> The use case is, I am walking a complex object graph and persisting what >> I find there. Said object graph in my case is always EMF (eclipse modeling >> framework) compliant. An EMF graph can have in if references to--brace >> yourself--a non-cross document containment reference. When using Mongo, >> these were persisted as a DBObject embedded into a containing DBObject. >> I'm trying to decide whether I want to follow suit. >> >> Any thoughts? >> >> >> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Sean Busbey <[email protected]> wrote: >> >>> Can you describe the use case more? Do you know what the purpose for the >>> embedded changes are? >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Apr 24, 2014 at 2:59 PM, Geoffry Roberts <[email protected] >>> > wrote: >>> >>>> All, >>>> >>>> I am in the throws of converting some(else's) code from MongoDB to >>>> Accumulo. I am seeing a situation where one DBObject if being embedded >>>> into another DBObject. I see that Mutation supports a method called >>>> getRow() that returns a byte array. I gather I can use this to achieve a >>>> similar result if I were so inclined. >>>> >>>> Am I so inclined? i.e. Is this the way we do things in Accumulo? >>>> >>>> DBObject, roughly speaking, is Mongo's counterpart to Mutation. >>>> >>>> Thanks mucho >>>> >>>> -- >>>> There are ways and there are ways, >>>> >>>> Geoffry Roberts >>>> >>> >>> >>> >>> -- >>> Sean >>> >> >> >> >> -- >> There are ways and there are ways, >> >> Geoffry Roberts >> > >
