I thought when multiple values with the same key, family, qualifier and timestamps were written, the one that was written latest (as determined by position in the store) would be read. Is that not the case?
--Tom On Saturday, August 25, 2012, lars hofhansl <[email protected]> wrote: > The prefix encoding applies to blocks in the HFiles and in the block cache, but not to the memstore. > > > #1 Yes. Each column family is its own store. All stores are flushed together, so have many add overhead (especially if a few tend to hold a lot of data, but the others don't, leading to very many small store files that need to be compacted). > #2 There is only one key with the same key, column family, qualifier, and timestamp (if you write multiple with the same timestamp it is undefined which one you'll get back when you read the next time). So that does not make sense. Writes with the same key, column family, qualifier (each with a different timestamp) count towards the version limit. > > -- Lars > > > ----- Original Message ----- > From: Eric Czech <[email protected]> > To: user <[email protected]> > Cc: > Sent: Saturday, August 25, 2012 2:44 PM > Subject: MemStore and prefix encoding > > Hi everyone, > > Does prefix encoding apply to rows in MemStores or does it only apply > to rows on disk in HFiles? I'm trying to decide if I should still > favor larger values in order to not repeat keys, column families, and > qualifiers more than necessary and while prefix encoding seems to > negate that concern for storage on disk, I'm not sure if it's still > applicable to in-memory storage. > > Also, I had two other quick (unrelated) questions and I assume it'd be > less annoying if I put them all in one email: > > 1. Do column families defined for a table introduce any overhead for > rows that don't put any values in them? I don't think that's the case > but I wanted to be sure. > > 2. Do writes with the same key, column family, qualifier, and > timestamp count towards the version limit? > > Thanks for the help! > >
