On Wed, Jul 17, 2013 at 1:47 AM, Michał Michalski <mich...@opera.com> wrote:
> According to my knowledge it's not necessarily true. In a specific case > this patch comes into play: > > https://issues.apache.org/**jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4671<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4671> > > "We could however purge tombstone if we know that the non-compacted > sstables doesn't have any info that is older than the tombstones we're > about to purge (since then we know that the tombstones we'll consider can't > delete data in non compacted sstables)." > There's also https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1074 "However, as we have bloom filters into each one of these SSTables, minor compaction can relatively inexpensively check for existence of this key in SSTable files not involved in the current minor compaction, and thereby delete the key, assuming all bloom filters return negative. If the filter returns positive, a major compaction would of course still be required." IIRC there may have been some minor caveats to this, but fwiw! =Rob
