heads up on on-disk data format changes in trunk

classic Classic list List threaded Threaded
2 messages Options
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

heads up on on-disk data format changes in trunk

Jonathan Ellis-3
Hi guys,

We're trying to get the data format incompatibilities done with before
we put out a 0.4 beta.  There's 3 coming up.  In order of when they
are likely to be finished:

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-341 -- to fix bugs (today)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-332 -- to make our
indexing more awesome (tomorrow?)
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-233 -- to make small
rows less bloated (by the end of the week)

For 341 and 332 forcing a compaction of your old sstables should cause
new sstables to be written in the correct format.  (Compaction ignores
the old indexes and creates new ones.)

For 233 there is no easy way to convert old sstables.

-Jonathan
Reply | Threaded
Open this post in threaded view
|

Re: heads up on on-disk data format changes in trunk

Jonathan Ellis-3
Re the index bugs: this is referring to column indexes, not key
indexes.  (The former are kept in the SSTable; the latter are in a
separate file.  Don't delete your -Index.db files. :)

And a correction: 341 is the only one that the compaction process will
fix, not 332 as well.

-Jonathan

On Tue, Aug 4, 2009 at 5:52 PM, Jonathan Ellis<[hidden email]> wrote:

> Hi guys,
>
> We're trying to get the data format incompatibilities done with before
> we put out a 0.4 beta.  There's 3 coming up.  In order of when they
> are likely to be finished:
>
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-341 -- to fix bugs (today)
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-332 -- to make our
> indexing more awesome (tomorrow?)
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-233 -- to make small
> rows less bloated (by the end of the week)
>
> For 341 and 332 forcing a compaction of your old sstables should cause
> new sstables to be written in the correct format.  (Compaction ignores
> the old indexes and creates new ones.)
>
> For 233 there is no easy way to convert old sstables.
>
> -Jonathan
>