Suraj Varma <svarma.ng@...> writes:
>
> It really depends on your access patterns.
> One option could be having column names as email_<type> and the value as
> email address. (e.g email_home:user@..., email_work:user@...,
> etc). This will allow you to select specific emails (e.g. email_home and
> email_work) in your Get.
>
> Or if you prefer having both type and email address as values, you'd have to
> resort to a straight marshalling of the List<> as column names
> email_type_1:value=<type>, email_address_1:value=<address>. This would be
> appropriate if you always want the full set and you plan to reconstitute
> your List<> in full each time.
>
> --Suraj
>
What if you have a column like {NAME =>'address', VERSIONS =>50) and you store
in each version a different email address. Is using the column versioning in
this way a bad thing? Is there any limitation or constraints on the number of
versions for a column. I was thinking to define VERSION=>1500 on a column. Any
drawbacks using it in this way?
I will much appreciate your answer.
Thanks in advance.
