asterixdb-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Mike Carey <dtab...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Metadata changes
Date Mon, 14 Dec 2015 21:23:56 GMT
Thoughts inlined:

On 12/14/15 11:12 AM, Steven Jacobs wrote:
> Here are the conclusions that Ildar and I have drawn from looking at the
> secondary indexes:
>
> First of all it seems that datasets are local to node groups, but
> dataverses can span node groups, which seems a little odd to me.
Node groups are an undocumented but to-be-exploited-someday feature that 
allows datasets to be stored on less than all nodes in a given cluster.  
As we face bigger clusters, we'll want to open up that possibility.  We 
will hopefully use them inside w/o having to make users manage them 
manually like parallel DB2 did/does.  Dataverses are really just a 
namespace thing, not a storage thing at all, so they are orthogonal to 
(and unrelated to) node groups.
>
> There are three Metadata secondary indexes:  GROUPNAME_ON_DATASET_INDEX,
> DATATYPENAME_ON_DATASET_INDEX, DATATYPENAME_ON_DATATYPE_INDEX
>
> The first is used in only one case:
> When dropping a node group, check if there are any datasets using this node
> group. If so, don't allow the drop
> BUT, this index has a field called "dataverse" which is not used at all.
This one seems like a waste of space since we do this almost never. (Not 
much space, but unnecessary.)  If we keep it it should become a proper 
index.
>
> The second is used when dropping a datatype. If there is a dataset using
> this datatype, don't allow the drop.
> Similarly, this index has a "dataverse" which is never used.
You're about to use the dataverse part, right?  :-)  This index seems 
like it will be useful but should be a proper index.
>
> The third index is used to go in two cases, using two different ideas of
> "keys"
> It seems like this should actually be two different indexes.
I don't think I understood this comment....
>
> This is my understanding so far. It would be good to discuss what the
> "correct" version should be.
> Steven
>
>
>
>
> On Mon, Dec 14, 2015 at 10:12 AM, Steven Jacobs <sjaco002@ucr.edu> wrote:
>
>> Hi all,
>> I'm implementing a change so that datasets can use datatypes from
>> alternate data verses (previously the type and set had to be from the same
>> dataverse). Unfortunately this means another change for Dataset Metadata
>> (which will now store the dataverse for its type).
>>
>> As such, I had a couple of questions:
>>
>> 1) Should this change be thrown into the release branch, as it is another
>> Metadata change?
>>
>> 2) In implementing this change, I've been looking at the Metadata
>> secondary indexes. I had a discussion with Ildar, and it seems the thread
>> on Metadata secondary indexes being "hacked" has been lost. Is this also
>> something that should get into the release? Is there anyone currently
>> looking at it?
>>
>> Steven
>>


Mime
  • Unnamed multipart/alternative (inline, None, 0 bytes)
View raw message