check if table is empty in cassandra DB - cassandra

I am trying to find a way to determine if the table is empty in Cassandra DB.
cqlsh> SELECT * from examples.basic ;
key | value
-----+-------
(0 rows)
I am running count(*) to get the value of the number of rows , but I am getting warning message, So I wanted to know if there is any better way to check if the table is empty(zero rows).
cqlsh> SELECT count(*) from examples.basic ;
count
-------
0
(1 rows)
Warnings :
Aggregation query used without partition key
cqlsh>

Aggregations, like count, can be an overkill for what you are trying to accomplish, specially with the star wildcard, as if there is any data on your table, the query will need to do a full table scan. This can be quite expensive if you have several records.
One way to get the result you are looking for is the query
cqlsh> SELECT key FROM keyspace1.table1 LIMIT 1;
Empty table:
The resultset will be empty
cqlsh> SELECT key FROM keyspace1.table1 LIMIT 1;
key
-----
(0 rows)
Table with data:
The resultset will have a record
cqlsh> SELECT key FROM keyspace1.table1 LIMIT 1;
key
----------------------------------
uL24bhnsHYRX8wZItWM6xKdS0WLvDsgi
(1 rows)

Related

Cassandra warning: Aggregation query used without partition key

When I run a count query against C*, I get result with a warning:
cqlsh:my_keyspace> SELECT count(*) from user;
count
1
(1 rows)
Warnings : Aggregation query used without partition key
Warning is because C* has to do scan across all nodes.
But when I do this query:
cqlsh:my_keyspace> SELECT * FROM user;
last_name | first_name | title
-----------+------------+-------
Doe | John | Mr.
(1 rows)
This query doesn't show me a warning. Isn't this also supposed to scan all nodes?
Yes, both queries do a full table scan but the former uses an aggregate function while the latter doesn't.
COUNT() is an aggregate function -- it returns a final count by aggregating all rows in the query. This is the reason SELECT COUNT(*) generates a warning while SELECT * doesn't. Cheers!

how to check all null values in a particular column in cassandra table?

by using the below query i am not getting anyrecords
SELECT * FROM test_table where prty_ad_line3_tx = '' and prty_role_type_cd='Co-Borrower' and prty_role_sq_nb =5 limit 10 ALLOW FILTERING;
need help from your end.

Cassandra Result Not Responding Correct Rows in Tables

My Cassandra DB not responding as expected Row result. please see the below details of my Cassandra keyspace creation and to query of Count(*)
Connected to Test Cluster at 127.0.0.1:9042. [cqlsh 5.0.1 | Cassandra
3.11.0 | CQL spec 3.4.4 | Native protocol v4] Use HELP for help. cqlsh> CREATE KEYSPACE key1 WITH replication = {'class':'SimpleStrategy', 'replicationfactor' : 1};
cqlsh> CREATE TABLE Key.Transcation_CompleteMall (i text, i1 text static, i2 bigint , i3 int static, i4 decimal static, i5 bigint static, i6 decimal static, i7 decimal static, PRIMARY KEY ((i),i1));
cqlsh> COPY Key1.CompleteMall (i,i1,i2,i3,i4,i5,i6,i7) FROM '/home/gpadmin/all.csv' WITH HEADER = TRUE; Using 16 child processes
Starting copy of Key1.completemall with columns [i, i1, i2, i3, i4, i5, i6, i7]. Processed: 25461792 rows; Rate: 15162 rows/s; Avg. rate: 54681 rows/s
> **bold**25461792 rows imported from 1 files in 7 minutes and 45.642 seconds (0 skipped).
cqlsh> select count(*) from Key1.transcation_completemall; OperationTimedOut: errors={'127.0.0.1': 'Client request timeout. See Session.execute[_async](timeout)'}, last_host=127.0.0.1 cqlsh> exit
[gpadmin#hmaster ~]$ cqlsh --request-timeout=3600
Connected to Test Cluster at 127.0.0.1:9042.
[cqlsh 5.0.1 | Cassandra 3.11.0 | CQL spec 3.4.4 | Native protocol v4]
Use HELP for help.
cqlsh> select count(*) from starhub.transcation_completemall;
count
---------
**bold**2865767
(1 rows)
Warnings :
Aggregation query used without partition key
cqlsh>
I got only 2865767 rows but Copy command shows that 25461792 Rows accepted Cassandra. all.csv file has 2.5G size. For evaluating I exported the table to another file test.csv file which file size I wondered it became 252Mb.
My question is that, is Cassandra will automatically remove the duplicate in a row ?
If yes how the Cassandra delete the duplicate in a table? Like primary Key repetition or Partition Key or like exact field duplication?
or
What would be the possibility that data get Loss
Expected your valuable suggestion
Advance Thanks to you all
Cassandra will overwrite data with same primary key (Ideally all database will not have duplicate values for primary key(some throws constraint error,while some overwrites data)).
Example:
CREATE TABLE test(id int,id1 int,name text,PRIMARY KEY(id,id1))
INSERT INTO test(id,id1,name) VALUES(1,2,'test');
INSERT INTO test(id,id1,name) VALUES(1,1,'test1');
INSERT INTO test(id,id1,name) VALUES(1,2,'test2');
INSERT INTO test(id,id1,name) VALUES(1,1,'test1');
SELECT * FROM test;
-----------------
|id |id1 |name |
-----------------
|1 |2 |test2 |
-----------------
|1 |1 |test1 |
-----------------
The above statement will have only 2 records in table one with primary key (1,1) and other with primary key(1,2).
So in your case if values of i and i1 have duplicates that data will be overwritten.
Maybe check LIMIT option on SELECT statement, see ref doc here
Ref doc says:
Specifying rows returned using LIMIT
Using the LIMIT option, you can specify that the query return a limited number of rows.
SELECT COUNT() FROM big_table LIMIT 50000;
SELECT COUNT() FROM big_table LIMIT 200000;
The output of these statements if you had 105,291 rows in the database would be: 50000, and 105,291. The cqlsh shell has a default row limit of 10,000. The Cassandra server and native protocol do not limit the number of rows that can be returned, although a timeout stops running queries to protect against running malformed queries that would cause system instability.

Cassandra slow SELECT MAX(x) query

I have a dev machine with Cassandra 3.9 and 2 tables, one has ~~ 400,000 records, another about 40,000,000 records. Their structures are different.
Each of them has a secondary index on a field x, and I'm trying to run a query of the form SELECT MAX(x) FROM table. On the first table, the query takes a couple of seconds, and on the second table, it times out.
My experience is with relational databases where these queries are trivial and fast. So in Cassandra, it looks like the index isn't used to execute these queries? Is there an alternative?
In cassandra aggregation functions such as MIN, MAX, COUNT, SUM or AVG on a table without specifing a partition key is a bad practice. instead, you can have an other table that store the max value of x field for both tables.
However, you have to add some client side logic to maintain this max value in the other table when you run INSERT or UPDATE statements.
Tables structures :
CREATE TABLE t1 (
pk text PRIMARY KEY,
x int
);
CREATE TABLE t2 (
pk text PRIMARY KEY,
x int
);
CREATE TABLE agg_table (
table_name text PRIMARY KEY,
max_value int
);
So with this structure you can have the max value for a table :
SELECT max_value
FROM agg_table
WHERE table_name = 't1';
Hope this can help you.

Can an index be created on a UUID Column?

Is it possible to create an index on a UUID/TIMEUUID column in Cassandra? I'm testing out a model design which would have an index on a UUID column, but queries on that column always return 0 rows found.
I have a table like this:
create table some_data (site_id int, user_id int, run_id uuid, value int, primary key((site_id, user_id), run_id));
I create an index with this command:
create index idx on some_data (run_id) ;
No errors are thrown by CQL when I create this index.
I have a small bit of test data in the table:
site_id | user_id | run_id | value
---------+---------+--------------------------------------+-----------------
1 | 1 | 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d | 3
However, when I run the query:
select * from some_data where run_id = 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d
CQLSH just returns: (0 rows)
If I use an int for the run_id then the index behaves as expected.
Yes, you can create a secondary index on a UUID. The real question is "should you?"
In any case, I followed your steps, and got it to work.
Connected to Test Cluster at 192.168.23.129:9042.
[cqlsh 5.0.1 | Cassandra 2.1.2 | CQL spec 3.2.0 | Native protocol v3]
Use HELP for help.
aploetz#cqlsh> use stackoverflow ;
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> create table some_data (site_id int, user_id int, run_id uuid, value int, primary key((site_id, user_id), run_id));
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> create index idx on some_data (run_id) ;
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> INSERT INTO some_data (site_id, user_id, run_id, value) VALUES (1,1,9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d,3);
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> select * from usr_rec3 where run_id = 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d;
code=2200 [Invalid query] message="unconfigured columnfamily usr_rec3"
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> select * from some_data where run_id = 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d;
site_id | user_id | run_id | value
---------+---------+--------------------------------------+-------
1 | 1 | 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d | 3
(1 rows)
Notice though, that when I ran this command, it failed:
select * from usr_rec3 where run_id = 9e118af0-ac92-11e4-81ae-8d1bc921f26d
Are you sure that you didn't mean to select from some_data instead?
Also, creating secondary indexes on high-cardinality columns (like a UUID) is generally not a good idea. If you need to query by run_id, then you should revisit your data model and come up with an appropriate query table to serve that.
Clarification:
Using secondary indexes in general is not considered good practice. In the new book Cassandra High Availability, Robbie Strickland identifies their use as an anti-pattern, due to poor performance.
Just because a column is of the UUID data type doesn't necessarily make it high-cardinality. That's more of a data model question for you. But knowing the nature of UUIDs and their underlying purpose toward being unique, is setting off red flags.
Put these two points together, and there isn't anything about creating an index on a UUID that sounds appealing to me. If it were my cluster, and (more importantly) I had to support it later, I wouldn't do it.

Resources