Oh right frozen vs unfrozen. On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 2:23 PM DuyHai Doan <doanduy...@gmail.com> wrote:
> It depends on.. Latest version of Cassandra allows unfrozen UDT. The > individual fields of UDT are updated atomically and they are stored > effectively in distinct physical columns inside the partition, thus > applying ttl() on them makes sense. I'm not sure however if the CQL parser > allows this syntax > > On Mon, Dec 9, 2019 at 9:13 PM Carl Mueller > <carl.muel...@smartthings.com.invalid> wrote: > >> I could be wrong, but UDTs I think are written (and overwritten) as one >> unit, so the notion of a TTL on a UDT field doesn't exist, the TTL is >> applied to the overall structure. >> >> Think of it like a serialized json object with multiple fields. To update >> a field they deserialize the json, then reserialize the json with the new >> value, and the whole json object has the new timestamp or ttl. >> >> On Tue, Dec 3, 2019 at 10:02 AM Mark Furlong <mfurl...@ancestry.com> >> wrote: >> >>> When I run the command ‘select ttl(udt_field) from table; I’m getting an >>> error ‘InvalidRequest: Error from server: code=2200 [Invalid query] >>> message="Cannot use selection function ttl on collections"’. How can I get >>> the TTL from a UDT field? >>> >>> >>> >>> *Mark Furlong* >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> We empower journeys of personal discovery to enrich lives >>> >>> >>> >>> >>> >>
