It seems as though secondary indexes are not supported in tables (column
families) that have composite keys. Is that true? If so, are there plans to
suport that combination in the future?
-Roland
I am using C* 1.1 and CQL 3.0. Am trying to do a select with an IN clause
for the primary key, and on an indexed column, which appears to not be
supported:
cqlsh:Keyspace1> SELECT * FROM TestTable WHERE id IN ('1', '2') AND
data = 'b';
Bad Request: Select on indexed columns and with IN cla
I have a table with a 3 part composite key and I want to delete rows based
on the first 2 parts of the key. SELECT works using 2 parts of the key, but
DELETE fails with the error:
Bad Request: Missing mandatory PRIMARY KEY part part3
(see details below). Is there a reason why deleting based o
http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/whats-new-in-cql-3-0
It's my understanding that that the actual reference documentation for 3.0
should be ready soon. Anyone know when?
-Roland
On Wed, May 16, 2012 at 12:04 AM, Tamil selvan R.S wrote:
> Hi,
> Is there a tutorial or reference on CQL 3.0 Feature
Suppose I have a table in CQL3 with a 2 part composite, and I do a select
that specifies just the second part of the key (not the partition key),
will this result in a full table scan, or is the second part of the key
indexed?
Example:
cqlsh:"Keyspace1"> CREATE TABLE test_table (part1 text, part2
This is a known issue, see
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4193.
In the meantime, a workaround is to specify all the column names to be
deleted. I.e.,
delete my_value from testCol where my_id='1_71548' and
time_id=2fc39fa0-1dd5-11b2-9b6a-395f35722afe;
should work.
(I had the s
27;t do everything as much as the other clients
>
> 2012/5/24 Roland Mechler
>
>> Suppose I have a table in CQL3 with a 2 part composite, and I do a select
>> that specifies just the second part of the key (not the partition key),
>> will this result in a full table sca
Anyone have a rough idea of when Cassandra 1.1.1 is likely to be released?
-Roland
