Thanks J-D

On Thu, Sep 15, 2011 at 4:15 PM, Jean-Daniel Cryans <[email protected]>wrote:

> For checkAndPut, is there a column that you know will exist that
> you're not updating that you know for sure which value it will have?
> Worst case you could use a dummy column just for that.
>
> Column data is not predictable
Can I implement this functionality  on the lines of checkAndPut , calling it
updateOnlyIfRowExists () ,


> For increments, I can't think of a way to do it without either
> implementing a checkAndIncrement or doing 2 roundtrips.
>
>


> J-D
>


-Sagar

>
> On Wed, Sep 14, 2011 at 7:00 PM, sagar naik <[email protected]> wrote:
> > Hello Friends,
> >
> > We have a case in our application where we need to update values or
> > increment values only if the row is present.
> > Primary reason being, row key received may be corrupt or invalid. We dont
> > want to create dangling rows.
> >
> > Obviously,
> >  - get row key and check if the row exists, then update is a costly call.
> 2
> > round trips for each update
> >  - checkAndPut -> one needs to knw row,family,qualifer and value to
> > accomplish this. I initially thought passing just rowkey and value=rowKey
> > will work. But, u need all the arguments.
> >  - Is there any hack u can recommend to work around this problem.
> >  - Also, for increment, how do I implement it.
> >
> > In short, any update/increment should happen only if row key is present.
> So
> > this will help me achieve some data integrity
> >
> >
> > Thanks
> > The community is super helpful
> > So Thanks again :)
> >
> > -Sagar
> >
>

Reply via email to