Hi Nanda, This error occurs if your table is immutable, you have an index on the table, and your WHERE clause is filtering on a column not contained in all of the indexes. If that's not the case, would you mind posting a complete end-to-end test as it's possible you're hitting a bug. Thanks, James
On Sat, Feb 20, 2016 at 10:25 AM, Nanda <[email protected]> wrote: > Hi, > > I am using Phoenix 4.4 and when executing the below query i get an > exception as below, > I have indexes on the below "some_table" on column report_time in all the > indexes created. > > Delete from some_table where TO_NUMBER(report_time) <= 1455937500000 > > > > java.sql.SQLException: ERROR 1027 (42Y86): All columns referenced in a > WHERE clause must be available in every index for a table with immutable > rows. tableName=some_table > at > org.apache.phoenix.exception.SQLExceptionCode$Factory$1.newException(SQLExceptionCode.java:386) > at > org.apache.phoenix.exception.SQLExceptionInfo.buildException(SQLExceptionInfo.java:145) > at > org.apache.phoenix.compile.DeleteCompiler.compile(DeleteCompiler.java:389) > at > org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement$ExecutableDeleteStatement.compilePlan(PhoenixStatement.java:546) > at > org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement$ExecutableDeleteStatement.compilePlan(PhoenixStatement.java:534) > at > org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement$2.call(PhoenixStatement.java:302) > at > org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement$2.call(PhoenixStatement.java:295) > at org.apache.phoenix.call.CallRunner.run(CallRunner.java:53) > at > org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement.executeMutation(PhoenixStatement.java:293) > at > org.apache.phoenix.jdbc.PhoenixStatement.execute(PhoenixStatement.java:1247) > at sqlline.Commands.execute(Commands.java:822) > at sqlline.Commands.sql(Commands.java:732) > at sqlline.SqlLine.dispatch(SqlLine.java:808) > at sqlline.SqlLine.begin(SqlLine.java:681) > at sqlline.SqlLine.start(SqlLine.java:398) > at sqlline.SqlLine.main(SqlLine.java:292) > > > > Any Idea what that error exactly meant? > > Thanks, > Nanda >
