I recommend you to review newts data model, which is a time-series data model 
upon cassandra:

https://github.com/OpenNMS/newts/wiki/DataModel



Sent using Zoho Mail









First the use-case: We have time-series of data from devices on several sites, 
where each device (with a unique dev_id) can have several sensors attached to 
it. Most queries however are both time limited as well as over a range of 
dev_ids, even for a single sensor (Multi-sensor joins are a whole different 
beast for another day!). We want to have a schema where the query can complete 
in time linear to the query ranges for both devices and time range, immaterial 
(largely) to the total data size. 





So we explored several different primary key definitions, learning from the 
best-practices communicated on this mailing list and over the interwebs. While 
details about the setup (Spark over C*) and schema are in a companion blog/site 
here [1], we just mention the primary keys and the key points here. 



PRIMARY KEY (dev_id, day, rec_time)


PRIMARY KEY ((dev_id, rec_time)


PRIMARY KEY (day, dev_id, rec_time)


PRIMARY KEY ((day, dev_id), rec_time)


PRIMARY KEY ((dev_id, day), rec_time)


Combination of above by adding a year field in the schema.




The main takeaway (again, please read through the details at [1]) is that we 
really don't have a single schema to answer the use case above without some 
drawback. Thus while the ((day, dev_id), rec_time) gives a constant response, 
it is dependent entirely on the total data size (full scan). On the other hand, 
(dev_id, day, rec_time) and its counterpart (day, dev_id, rec_time) provide 
acceptable results, we have the issue of very large partition space in the 
first, and hotspot while writing for the latter case.



We also observed that having a multi-field partition key allows for fast 
querying only if the "=" is used going left to right. If an IN() (for 
specifying eg. range of time or list of devices) is used once that order, than 
any further usage of IN() removes any benefit (i.e. a near full table scan).



Another useful learning was that using the IN() to query for days is less 
useful than putting in a range query.



Currently, it seems we are in a bind --- should we use a different data store 
for our usecase (which seems quite typical for IoT)? Something like HDFS or 
Parquet? We would love to get feedback on the benchmarking results and how we 
can possibly improve this and share widely.


[1] Cassandra Benchmarks over Time Series Data for IoT Use Case

       https://sites.google.com/an10.io/timeseries-results






-- 

Regards,

Arbab Khalil

Software Design Engineer








Reply via email to