> >>> Is it guaranteed that the rows are grouped by the value of the >>> partition key? That is, is it guaranteed that I'll get yes.
----------------- Aaron Morton Freelance Cassandra Consultant New Zealand @aaronmorton http://www.thelastpickle.com On 12/04/2013, at 7:24 PM, Sorin Manolache <sor...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 2013-04-11 22:10, aaron morton wrote: >>> Is it guaranteed that the rows are grouped by the value of the >>> partition key? That is, is it guaranteed that I'll get >> Your primary key (k1, k2) is considered in type parts (partition_key , >> grouping_columns). In your case the primary_key is key and the grouping >> column in k2. Columns are ordered by the grouping columns, k2. >> >> See http://thelastpickle.com/2013/01/11/primary-keys-in-cql/ > > Thank you for the answer. > > However my question was about the _grouping_ (not ordering) of _rows_ (not > columns). > > Sorin > >> >> Cheers >> >> ----------------- >> Aaron Morton >> Freelance Cassandra Consultant >> New Zealand >> >> @aaronmorton >> http://www.thelastpickle.com >> >> On 12/04/2013, at 3:19 AM, Sorin Manolache <sor...@gmail.com >> <mailto:sor...@gmail.com>> wrote: >> >>> Hello, >>> >>> Let us consider that we have a table t created as follows: >>> >>> create table t(k1 vachar, k2 varchar, value varchar, primary key (k1, >>> k2)); >>> >>> Its contents is >>> >>> a m x >>> a n y >>> z 0 9 >>> z 1 8 >>> >>> and I perform a >>> >>> select * from p where k1 in ('a', 'z'); >>> >>> Is it guaranteed that the rows are grouped by the value of the >>> partition key? That is, is it guaranteed that I'll get >>> >>> a m x >>> a n y >>> z 0 9 >>> z 1 8 >>> >>> or >>> >>> a n y >>> a m x >>> z 1 8 >>> z 0 9 >>> >>> or even >>> >>> z 0 9 >>> z 1 8 >>> a n y >>> a m x >>> >>> but NEVER >>> >>> a m x >>> z 0 9 >>> a n y >>> z 1 8 >>> >>> >>> Thank you, >>> Sorin >> >
