It's not so hard to implement your mapping suggestion in your application, rather than in Cassandra, if you really want it.
On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 1:05 PM, Terje Marthinussen <tmarthinus...@gmail.com > wrote: > No benefit? > Making it easier to use column families as part of your data model is a > fairly good benefit, at least given the somewhat special data model > cassandra offers. Much more of a benefit than the disadvantages I can > imagine. > > fileprefix=`sometool -fileprefix tablename` > is something I would say is a lot more unixy than windows like. > > Sorry, I don't share your concern for large scale operations here, but > sure, '_' does the trick for me now so thanks to Aaron for reminding me > about that. > > Some day I am sure there will be realized that unicode strings/byte arrays > are useful here like most other places in Cassandra (\w is a bit limited for > some of us living in the non-ascii part of the world...), but "what is the > XXX way" are not the type of topics I find interesting, so another time. > > Terje > > > > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 5:30 PM, Benjamin Black <b...@b3k.us> wrote: > >> This is not the Unix way for good reason: it creates all manner of >> operational challenges for no benefit. This is how Windows does >> everything and automation and operations for large-scale online >> services is _hellish_ because of it. This horse is sufficiently >> beaten, though. >> >> >> b >> >> On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 11:55 PM, Terje Marthinussen >> <tmarthinus...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > Another option would of course be to store a mapping between >> dir/filenames >> > and Keyspace/columns familes together with other info related to >> keyspaces >> > and column families. Just add API/command line tools to look up the >> > filenames and maybe store the values in the files as well for recovery >> > purposes. >> > >> > Terje >> > >> > On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 3:39 PM, Janne Jalkanen < >> janne.jalka...@ecyrd.com> >> > wrote: >> >> >> >> I've been doing it for years with no technical problems. However, using >> >> "%" as the escape char tends to, in some cases, confuse a certain >> operating >> >> system whose name may or may not begin with "W", so using something >> else >> >> makes sense. >> >> However, it does require an extra cognitive step for the maintainer, >> since >> >> the mapping between filenames and logical names is no longer >> immediately >> >> obvious. Especially with multiple files this can be a pain (e.g. >> Chinese >> >> logical names which map to pretty incomprehensible sequences that are >> >> laborious to look up). >> >> So my experience suggests to avoid it for ops reasons, and just go with >> >> simplicity. >> >> /Janne >> >> On Aug 31, 2010, at 08:39 , Terje Marthinussen wrote: >> >> >> >> Beyond aesthetics, specific reasons? >> >> >> >> Terje >> >> >> >> On Tue, Aug 31, 2010 at 11:54 AM, Benjamin Black <b...@b3k.us> wrote: >> >>> >> >>> URL encoding. >> >>> >> >> >> > >> > >> > >
