On Jun 9, 2011, at 10:04 PM, aaron morton wrote:
> I may be missing something but could you use a column for each of the last 48
> hours all in the same row for a url ?
>
> e.g.
> {
> "/url.com/hourly" : {
> "20110609T01:00:00" : 456,
> "20110609T02:00:00" : 4567,
> }
> }
yes.. that would work better... I was storing all the different times in the
same row.
{
"/url.com" : {
"H-20110609T01:00:00" : 456,
"H-0110609T02:00:00" : 4567,
"D-0110609" : 5678,
}
}
I am wondering how to index on the most recent hour as well. (ie show me top 5
URLs type query)..
>
> Increment the current hour only. Delete the older columns either when a read
> detects there are old values or as a maintenance job. Or as part of writing
> values for the first 5 minutes of any hour.
yes.. I thought of that. The problem with doing it on read is there may be a
case where a old URL never gets read.. so it will just sit there taking up
space.. the maintenance job is the route I went down.
>
> The row will get spread out over a lot of sstables which may reduce read
> speed. If this is a problem consider a separate CF with more aggressive GC
> and compaction settings.
Thanks!
>
> Cheers
>
>
> -----------------
> Aaron Morton
> Freelance Cassandra Developer
> @aaronmorton
> http://www.thelastpickle.com
>
> On 10 Jun 2011, at 09:28, Ian Holsman wrote:
>
>> So would doing something like storing it in reverse (so I know what to
>> delete) work? Or is storing a million columns in a supercolumn impossible.
>>
>> I could always use a logfile and run the archiver off that as a worst case I
>> guess.
>> Would doing so many deletes screw up the db/cause other problems?
>>
>> ---
>> Ian Holsman - 703 879-3128
>>
>> I saw the angel in the marble and carved until I set him free -- Michelangelo
>>
>> On 09/06/2011, at 4:22 PM, Ryan King <r...@twitter.com> wrote:
>>
>>> On Thu, Jun 9, 2011 at 1:06 PM, Ian Holsman <had...@holsman.net> wrote:
>>>> Hi Ryan.
>>>> you wouldn't have your version of cassandra up on github would you??
>>>
>>> No, and the patch isn't in our version yet either. We're still working on
>>> it.
>>>
>>> -ryan
>
