Super columns have the same fundamental problem and perform worse in general. So switching from composites to super columns is NEVER a good idea.
On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 1:19 PM, Aditya <ady...@gmail.com> wrote: > Since I have around 20 items to query, I guess making 20 queries to > retrieve activities by all followies on all of those 20 columns would too > inefficient, so to take the advantage of more efficient queries, are > supercolumns recommended for this case ? Anyways, in case I use > supercolumns, I need to retrieve the entire supercolumn at any point of > time & I am writing subcolumn(s) to the supercolumn at different times not > at once. > > On Wed, Dec 28, 2011 at 8:07 PM, Edward Capriolo <edlinuxg...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> You need to execute one get slice operation for each item id or if the >> row is not large , you can try one large get slice on the entire row and >> deal with the results client side. >> >> If you try method 1 When doing slices on composites you can set the start >> inclusive or exclusive values to get only the column you want and not some >> extra columns up to slice range size. >> >> >> On Tuesday, December 27, 2011, Aditya <ady...@gmail.com> wrote: >> > I need to store data of all activities by user's followies in single >> row. I am trying to do that making use of composite column names in a >> single user specific row named 'rowX'. >> > On any activity by a user's followie on an item, a column is stored in >> 'rowX'. The column has a composite type column name made up of >> itemId+userId (which makes it unique col. name) in rowX. (& column value >> contains the activity data related to that item by that followie) >> > >> > Now I want to retrieve activity by all users on a list of items. So I >> need to retrieve all composite columns with composite's first component >> matching the itemId. Is it possible to do such a query to Cassandra ? I am >> using Hector. >> > >
