You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to dev@phoenix.apache.org by "Enis Soztutar (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2016/07/12 00:42:10 UTC

[jira] [Commented] (PHOENIX-2565) Store data for immutable tables in single KeyValue

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2565?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15371983#comment-15371983 ] 

Enis Soztutar commented on PHOENIX-2565:
----------------------------------------

This is a great addition. Is there a short design doc that explains the feature?
I think we should not couple immutable tables with "compact storage". There can be cases where you would want to keep columns non-compact in immutable tables, and compact for mutable tables. The features should be orthogonal. If you are mutating an mutable column value, it can be read-modify-write similar to secondary index updates. 
Is compact storage all or nothing for a table? What about column families? Should we look into having a subset of columns to be stored together, something like the original locality-groups versus column family from bigtable (HBase column family is both locality group and column family in the big table terminology). 

> Store data for immutable tables in single KeyValue
> --------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: PHOENIX-2565
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/PHOENIX-2565
>             Project: Phoenix
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: James Taylor
>            Assignee: Thomas D'Silva
>             Fix For: 4.9.0
>
>         Attachments: PHOENIX-2565-wip.patch
>
>
> Since an immutable table (i.e. declared with IMMUTABLE_ROWS=true) will never update a column value, it'd be more efficient to store all column values for a row in a single KeyValue. We could use the existing format we have for variable length arrays.
> For backward compatibility, we'd need to support the current mechanism. Also, you'd no longer be allowed to transition an existing table to/from being immutable. I think the best approach would be to introduce a new IMMUTABLE keyword and use it like this:
> {code}
> CREATE IMMUTABLE TABLE ...
> {code}



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)