I need to alter the table to add a new column after a particular column or as last column, I have been through the document but no luck.
Let's say I'm starting with a table that has this definition:
CREATE TABLE mykeyspace.letterstable (
column_n TEXT,
column_b TEXT,
column_c TEXT,
column_z TEXT,
PRIMARY KEY (column_n));
1- Adding a column is a simple matter.
ALTER TABLE mykeyspace.letterstable ADD column_j TEXT;
2- After adding the new column, my table definition will look like this:
desc table mykeyspace.letterstable;
CREATE TABLE mykeyspace.letterstable (
column_n TEXT,
column_b TEXT,
column_c TEXT,
column_j TEXT,
column_z TEXT,
PRIMARY KEY (column_n));
This is because columns in Cassandra are stored by ASCII-betical order, after the keys (so column_n will always be first, because it is the only key). I can't tell Cassandra that I want my new column_j to go after column_z. It's going to put it between column_c and column_z on its own.
Cassandra will store table data based on partition & clustering key.
Standard CQL for adding column:
ALTER TABLE keyspace.table ADD COLUMN column1 columnType;
Running DESC table for a given table via CQLSH does not portray how the data is stored. It will always list the partition key & clustering key first; then the remaining columns in alphabetical order.
https://docs.datastax.com/en/cql/3.1/cql/cql_reference/alter_table_r.html
Cassandra create table won't keep column order
Related
I use the following CQL queries to create a table and write data, the problem is that the data in my table are not organized by date order.
I would like to have them organized by date without having to put the same id.
To create table :
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS sk1_000.data(id varchar, date_serveur timestamp ,nom_objet varchar, temperature double, etat boolean , PRIMARY KEY (id, date_serveur)) with clustering order by (date_serveur DESC);
To insert :
INSERT INTO sk1_000.data(id, date_serveur,nom_objet, temperature, etat) VALUES ('"+ uuid.v4() +"', '1501488930499','Raspberry_pi', 22.5, true) if not exists ;
Here is the output :
In Cassandra, the clustering key guarantees sort order for a given partition key and not across different partitioning key(s).
To achieve what you are looking for "sort by date across all keys", you will have to redesign the table to have date_serveur as partitioning key and id as clustering column. But guess what you can't directly query based on an id with this table design.
In the below table, what is the maximum size phone_numbers column can accommodate ?
Like normal columns, is it 2GB ?
Is it 64K*64K as mentioned here
CREATE TABLE d2.employee (
id int PRIMARY KEY,
doj timestamp,
name text,
phone_numbers map<text, text>
)
Collection types in Cassandra are represented as a set of distinct cells in the internal data model: you will have a cell for each key of your phone_numbers column. Therefore they are not normal columns, but a set of columns. You can verify this by executing the following command in cassandra-cli (1001 stands for a valid employee id):
use d2;
get employee[1001];
The good answer is your point 2.
I am upgrading my thrift api to cql3. My data contains SuperColumns as follows:
- User //column family
- Division/name //my row key
-DivHead //SuperColumn
- name //Columns
- address //Columns
I understand all the column families to be changed to tables. And the primary key becomes the rowkey. So rest are the columns.
But my data has supercolumns. how do I create supercolumns using CQL3?
CREATE TABLE user (
rowkey varchar,
division text,
head_name text,
address text,
PRIMARY KEY (rowkey, division)
)
OR
CREATE TABLE user (
rowkey varchar,
division text,
head_name text,
head_address text,
PRIMARY KEY ((rowkey, division))
)
Under the covers the first example will have each rowkey assigned to the same partition. Each rowkey will have a set of logical rows, one for each division. Those rows will contain two columns: head_name and head_address. You can query based on the rowkey and get all divisions (sorted!). Or you can query a rowkey with a range of divisions or a single division and get a subset of the divisions with their division head and address.
The second example will have one partition for each rowkey and division combination. Each such partition will be one logical row as well. The single row for each composite key will have two columns: head_name and head_address. To make a query, you must provide BOTH the rowkey and the division.
EDIT: Cleared up some bad grammar.
We are trying to store lots of attributes for a particular profile_id inside a table (using CQL3) and cannot wrap our heads around which approach is the best:
a. create table mytable (profile_id, a1 int, a2 int, a3 int, a4 int ... a3000 int) primary key (profile_id);
OR
b. create MANY tables, eg.
create table mytable_a1(profile_id, value int) primary key (profile_id);
create table mytable_a2(profile_id, value int) primary key (profile_id);
...
create table mytable_a3000(profile_id, value int) primary key (profile_id);
OR
c. create table mytable (profile_id, a_all text) primary key (profile_id);
and just store 3000 "columns" inside a_all, like:
insert into mytable (profile_id, a_all) values (1, "a1:1,a2:5,a3:55, .... a3000:5");
OR
d. none of the above
The type of query we would be running on this table:
select * from mytable where profile_id in (1,2,3,4,5423,44)
We tried the first approach and the queries keep timing out and sometimes even kill cassandra nodes.
The answer would be to use a clustering column. A clustering column allows you to create dynamic columns that you could use to hold the attribute name (col name) and it's value (col value).
The table would be
create table mytable (
profile_id text,
attr_name text,
attr_value int,
PRIMARY KEY(profile_id, attr_name)
)
This allows you to add inserts like
insert into mytable (profile_id, attr_name, attr_value) values ('131', 'a1', 3);
insert into mytable (profile_id, attr_name, attr_value) values ('131', 'a2', 1031);
.....
insert into mytable (profile_id, attr_name, attr_value) values ('131', 'an', 2);
This would be the optimal solution.
Because you then want to do the following
'The type of query we would be running on this table: select * from mytable where profile_id in (1,2,3,4,5423,44)'
This would require 6 queries under the hood but cassandra should be able to do this in no time especially if you have a multi node cluster.
Also if you use the DataStax Java Driver you can run this requests asynchronously and concurrently on your cluster.
For more on data modelling and the DataStax Java Driver check out DataStax's free online training. Its worth a look
http://www.datastax.com/what-we-offer/products-services/training/virtual-training
Hope it helps.
I'm trying to understand the type used when I create composite columns.
I'm using CQL3 (via cqlsh) to create the CF and then the CLI to issue a describe command.
The Types in the Columns sorted by: ...CompositeType(Type1,Type2,...) are not the ones I'm expecting.
I'm using Cassandra 1.1.6.
CREATE TABLE CompKeyTest1 (
KeyA int,
KeyB int,
KeyC int,
MyData varchar,
PRIMARY KEY (KeyA, KeyB, KeyC)
);
The returned CompositeType is
CompositeType(Int32,Int32,UTF8)
Shouldn't it be (Int32,Int32,Int32)?
CREATE TABLE CompKeyTest2 (
KeyA int,
KeyB varchar,
KeyC int,
MyData varchar,
PRIMARY KEY (KeyA, KeyB, KeyC)
);
The returned CompositeType is
CompositeType(UTF8,Int32,UTF8)
Why isn't it the same as the types used when I define the table? I'm probably missing something basic in the type assignment...
Thanks!
The composite column name is composed of the values of primary keys 2...n and the name of the non-primary key column being saved.
(So if you have 5 non-key fields then you'll have five such columns and their column names will differ only in the last composed value which would be the non-key field name.)
So in both examples the composite column is made up of the values of KeyB, KeyC and the name of the column being stored ("MyData", in both cases). That's why you're seeing those CompositeTypes being returned.
(btw, the first key in the primary key is the partitioning key and its value is only used as the row key (if you're familiar with Cassandra under the covers). It is not used as part of any of the composite column names.)