So problem solved! On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 1:37 PM, Ali Akhtar <ali.rac...@gmail.com> wrote:
> Yeah, I am using set<label> (not set<text> though) > > On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 5:36 PM, DuyHai Doan <doanduy...@gmail.com> wrote: > >> Yes you'd have to know the UDT values since it's part of the primary key >> to query your data. >> >> If I were you I would stick to using a set<text> and use UPDATE my_table >> SET labels = labels + <new_label>; >> >> It does work well with concurrent updates. >> >> On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 1:32 PM, Ali Akhtar <ali.rac...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> But then how would you query it? You'd need to know all the values of >>> the udt, right? >>> >>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 5:30 PM, DuyHai Doan <doanduy...@gmail.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>>> "Also can you make a UDT a clustered key?" --> yes if it's frozen >>>> >>>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 1:25 PM, Ali Akhtar <ali.rac...@gmail.com> >>>> wrote: >>>> >>>>> If I wanted to get all values for an item, including its labels, how >>>>> would that be done in the above case? >>>>> >>>>> Also can you make a UDT a clustered key? >>>>> >>>>> On Sun, Nov 13, 2016 at 4:33 AM, Manoj Khangaonkar < >>>>> khangaon...@gmail.com> wrote: >>>>> >>>>>> Hi, >>>>>> >>>>>> Instead of using a collection, consider making label a clustered >>>>>> column. >>>>>> >>>>>> With this each request will essentially append a column (label) to >>>>>> the partition. >>>>>> >>>>>> To get all labels would be a simple query >>>>>> >>>>>> select label from table where partitionkey = "value". >>>>>> >>>>>> In general , read + update of a column is an anti pattern in >>>>>> cassandra - which is what you are doing. What I suggesting >>>>>> above is appending more columns and not updating existing columns. >>>>>> >>>>>> regards >>>>>> >>>>>> regards >>>>>> >>>>>> On Sat, Nov 12, 2016 at 2:34 AM, Ali Akhtar <ali.rac...@gmail.com> >>>>>> wrote: >>>>>> >>>>>>> I have a table where each record contains a list<string> of labels. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> I have an endpoint which responds to new labels being added to a >>>>>>> record by the user. >>>>>>> >>>>>>> Consider the following scenario: >>>>>>> >>>>>>> - Record X, labels = [] >>>>>>> - User selects 2 labels, clicks a button, and 2 http requests are >>>>>>> generated. >>>>>>> - The server receives request for Label 1 and Label 2 at the same >>>>>>> time. >>>>>>> - Both requests see the labels as empty, add 1 label to the >>>>>>> collection, and send it. >>>>>>> - Record state as label 1 request sees it: [1], as label 2 sees it: >>>>>>> [2] >>>>>>> >>>>>>> How will the above conflict be resolved? What can I do so I end up >>>>>>> with [1, 2] instead of either [1] or [2] after both requests have been >>>>>>> processed? >>>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> >>>>>> -- >>>>>> http://khangaonkar.blogspot.com/ >>>>>> >>>>> >>>>> >>>> >>> >> >
