Thank you Rahul, but is it a good practice to use a large range here? Or would it be better to create partitions with more than 1 row (by using a clustering key)? >From a data query point of view I will be accessing the rows by a UID one at a time.

F Javier Pareja On Wed, Mar 7, 2018 at 11:12 AM, Rahul Singh <rahul.xavier.si...@gmail.com> wrote: > The range is 2*2^63 > > -- > Rahul Singh > rahul.si...@anant.us > > Anant Corporation > > On Mar 7, 2018, 6:06 AM -0500, Javier Pareja <pareja.jav...@gmail.com>, > wrote: > > Hello all, > > I have been trying to find an answer to the following but I have had no > luck so far: > Is there any limit to the number of partitions that a table can have? > Let's say a table has a partition key an no clustering key, is there a > recommended limit on the number of values that this partition key can have? > Is it recommended to have a clustering key to reduce this number by storing > several rows in each partition instead of one row per partition. > > Regards, > > F Javier Pareja > >