I have a table like this:
CREATE TABLE mytable (
user_id int,
device_id ascii,
record_time timestamp,
timestamp timeuuid,
info_1 text,
info_2 int,
PRIMARY KEY (user_id, device_id, record_time, timestamp)
);
When I ask Cassandra to delete a record (an entry in the columnfamily) like this:
DELETE from my_table where user_id = X and device_id = Y and record_time = Z and timestamp = XX;
it returns without an error, but when I query again the record is still there. Now if I try to delete a whole row like this:
DELETE from my_table where user_id = X
It works and removes the whole row, and querying again immediately doesn't return any more data from that row.
What I am doing wrong? How you can remove a record in Cassandra?
Thanks
Ok, here is my theory as to what is going on. You have to be careful with timestamps, because they will store data down to the millisecond. But, they will only display data to the second. Take this sample table for example:
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> SELECT id, datetime FROM data;
id | datetime
--------+--------------------------
B25881 | 2015-02-16 12:00:03-0600
B26354 | 2015-02-16 12:00:03-0600
(2 rows)
The datetimes (of type timestamp) are equal, right? Nope:
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> SELECT id, blobAsBigint(timestampAsBlob(datetime)),
datetime FROM data;
id | blobAsBigint(timestampAsBlob(datetime)) | datetime
--------+-----------------------------------------+--------------------------
B25881 | 1424109603000 | 2015-02-16 12:00:03-0600
B26354 | 1424109603234 | 2015-02-16 12:00:03-0600
(2 rows)
As you are finding out, this becomes problematic when you use timestamps as part of your PRIMARY KEY. It is possible that your timestamp is storing more precision than it is showing you. And thus, you will need to provide that hidden precision if you will be successful in deleting that single row.
Anyway, you have a couple of options here. One, find a way to ensure that you are not entering more precision than necessary into your record_time. Or, you could define record_time as a timeuuid.
Again, it's a theory. I could be totally wrong, but I have seen people do this a few times. Usually it happens when they insert timestamp data using dateof(now()) like this:
INSERT INTO table (key, time, data) VALUES (1,dateof(now()),'blah blah');
CREATE TABLE worker_login_table (
worker_id text,
logged_in_time timestamp,
PRIMARY KEY (worker_id, logged_in_time)
);
INSERT INTO worker_login_table (worker_id, logged_in_time)
VALUES ("worker_1",toTimestamp(now()));
after 1 hour executed the above insert statement once again
select * from worker_login_table;
worker_id| logged_in_time
----------+--------------------------
worker_1 | 2019-10-23 12:00:03+0000
worker_1 | 2015-10-23 13:00:03+0000
(2 rows)
Query the table to get absolute timestamp
select worker_id, blobAsBigint(timestampAsBlob(logged_in_time )), logged_in_time from worker_login_table;
worker_id | blobAsBigint(timestampAsBlob(logged_in_time)) | logged_in_time
--------+-----------------------------------------+--------------------------
worker_1 | 1524109603000 | 2019-10-23 12:00:03+0000
worker_1 | 1524209403234 | 2019-10-23 13:00:03+0000
(2 rows)
The below command will not delete the entry from Cassandra as the precise value of timestamp is required to delete the entry
DELETE from worker_login_table where worker_id='worker_1' and logged_in_time ='2019-10-23 12:00:03+0000';
By using the timestamp from blob we can delete the entry from Cassandra
DELETE from worker_login_table where worker_id='worker_1' and logged_in_time ='1524209403234';
Related
Hi I have created a table for storing data of like this
CREATE TABLE keyspace.test (
name text,
date text,
time double,
entry text,
details text,
PRIMARY KEY ((name, date), time)
) WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (time DESC);
And inserted data into the table.But a query like this gives an unordered result.
SELECT * FROM keyspace.test where device_id name ='anand' and date in ('2017-04-01','2017-04-02','2017-04-03','2017-04-05') ;
Is there any problem with my table design.
I think you are misunderstanding cassandra clustering key order. Cassandra Sort data with cluster key within a single partition.
That is for your case cassandra sort data with clustering key time within a single name and date.
Example : Let's insert some data
INSERT INTO test (name , date , time , entry ) VALUES ('anand', '2017-04-01', 1, 'a');
INSERT INTO test (name , date , time , entry ) VALUES ('anand', '2017-04-01', 2, 'b');
INSERT INTO test (name , date , time , entry ) VALUES ('anand', '2017-04-01', 3, 'c');
INSERT INTO test (name , date , time , entry ) VALUES ('anand', '2017-04-02', 0, 'nil');
INSERT INTO test (name , date , time , entry ) VALUES ('anand', '2017-04-02', 4, 'd');
If we select data with your query :
SELECT * FROM test where name ='anand' and date in ('2017-04-01','2017-04-02','2017-04-03','2017-04-05') ;
Output :
name | date | time | details | entry
-------+------------+------+---------+-------
anand | 2017-04-01 | 3 | null | c
anand | 2017-04-01 | 2 | null | b
anand | 2017-04-01 | 1 | null | a
anand | 2017-04-02 | 4 | null | d
anand | 2017-04-02 | 0 | null | nil
You can see that time 3,2,1 are within a single partition anand:2017-04-01 are sorted in desc And time 4,0 are within single partition anand:2017-04-02 are sorted in desc. Cassandra will not take care of sorting between different partition.
Here is the doc :
In the table definition, a clustering column is a column that is part of the compound primary key definition, but not the first column, which is the position reserved for the partition key. Columns are clustered in multiple rows within a single partition. The clustering order is determined by the position of columns in the compound primary key definition.
Source : http://docs.datastax.com/en/cql/3.1/cql/ddl/ddl_compound_keys_c.html
By the way why is your data field is text type and time field is double type ?
You can use date field as date type and time as timestamp type.
The query that you are using is o.k. but it probably doesn't behave as you are expecting it to because coordinator will not sort the results based on partitions. I also run into this problem couple of times.
The solution to it is very simple, basically It's far better to execute the 4 separate queries that you need on the client and then merge the results there. In short IN operator puts a lot of pressure to the coordinator node in the cluster, there's a nice read on this subject:
https://lostechies.com/ryansvihla/2014/09/22/cassandra-query-patterns-not-using-the-in-query-for-multiple-partitions/
I have the following table.
CREATE TABLE experiment(
id uuid,
country text,
data text,
insert_timestamp timestamp,
PRIMARY KEY(insert_timestamp));
I insert data via
INSERT INTO experiment(id, country, data, insert_timestamp) VALUES (uuid(), 'my', 'the data', dateof(now()));
When I
SELECT * from experiment;
I get
insert_timestamp | country | data | id
--------------------------+---------+----------+--------------------------------------
2016-03-03 03:04:36+0000 | my | the data | e08cddd2-b93d-4e39-b0f3-82b813f83a87
But, if I SELECT via insert_timestamp
SELECT * from experiment WHERE insert_timestamp = '2016-03-03 03:04:36+0000';
I get empty result.
insert_timestamp | country | data | id
------------------+---------+------+----
(0 rows)
Any idea why it is so?
A timestamp. Strings constant are allow to input timestamps as dates,
see Working with dates below for more information. Datestamps with
format YYYY-MM-DD HH:MM:SS.SSS are returned.
So when you query the data using 2016-03-03 03:04:36+0000 it is interpreted as 2016-03-03 03:04:36.0+0000 which might not be true when you inserted the data.
Hence it is returning 0 rows.
Note: The date format visible in cql shell is configured in cqlshrc file's UI section.
Also dateOf function is deprecated Details. And based on your data model if there are multiple threads writing data at same time your data will get override.
I'm new to Cassandra and I'm trying to define a data model that fits my requirements.
I have a sensor that collects one value every millisecond and I have to store those data in Cassandra. The queries that I want to perform are:
1) Give me all the sensor values from - to these timestamp values
2) Tell me when this range of values was recorded
I'm not sure if there exist a common schema that can satisfy both queries because I want to perform range queries on both values. For the first query I should use something like:
CREATE TABLE foo (
value text,
timestamp timestamp,
PRIMARY KEY (value, timestamp));
but then for the second query I need the opposite since I can't do range queries on the partition key without using a token that restricts the timestamp:
CREATE TABLE foo (
value text,
timestamp timestamp,
PRIMARY KEY (timestamp, value));
So do I need two tables for this? Or there exist another way?
Thanks
PS: I need to be as fast as possible while reading
I have a sensor that collects one value every millisecond and I have to store those data in Cassandra.
The main problem I see here, is that you're going to run into Cassandra's limit of 2 billion col values per partition fairly quickly. DataStax's Patrick McFadin has a good example for weather station data (Getting Started with Time Series Data Modeling) that seems to fit here. If I apply it to your model, it looks something like this:
CREATE TABLE fooByTime (
sensor_id text,
day text,
timestamp timestamp,
value text,
PRIMARY KEY ((sensor_id,day),timestamp)
);
This will partition on both sensor_id and day, while sorting rows within the partition by timestamp. So you could query like:
> SELECT * FROM fooByTime WHERE sensor_id='5' AND day='20151002'
AND timestamp > '2015-10-02 00:00:00' AND timestamp < '2015-10-02 19:00:00';
sensor_id | day | timestamp | value
-----------+----------+--------------------------+-------
5 | 20151002 | 2015-10-02 13:39:22-0500 | 24
5 | 20151002 | 2015-10-02 13:49:22-0500 | 23
And yes, the way to model in Cassandra, is to have one table for each query pattern. So your second table where you want to range query on value might look something like this:
CREATE TABLE fooByValues (
sensor_id text,
day text,
timestamp timestamp,
value text,
PRIMARY KEY ((sensor_id,day),value)
);
And that would support queries like:
> SELECT * FROm foobyvalues WHERE sensor_id='5'
AND day='20151002' AND value > '20' AND value < '25';
sensor_id | day | value | timestamp
-----------+----------+-------+--------------------------
5 | 20151002 | 22 | 2015-10-02 14:49:22-0500
5 | 20151002 | 23 | 2015-10-02 13:49:22-0500
5 | 20151002 | 24 | 2015-10-02 13:39:22-0500
I have a table called Price in MYSQL which looks like this :
+---------+-------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
| Field | Type | Null | Key | Default | Extra |
+---------+-------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
| Current | float(20,3) | YES | | NULL | |
| Time | timestamp | NO | | CURRENT_TIMESTAMP | on update CURRENT_TIMESTAMP |
+---------+-------------+------+-----+-------------------+-----------------------------+
My application requires me to sum and retrieve results from the last 1 hour, 2 hours up to the last week from now. I am trying to move to Cassandra and wanted to make a suitable model for my data. Currently i have built a table in Cassandra which looks something like this :
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS HAS.Price (
ID INT,
Current float,
Time timestamp,
Time_uuid timeuuid,
PRIMARY KEY (ID, Time_uuid)
);
This is not logical as it just creates one big table and i dont think this will distribute data to other nodes. I am using a fixed id of 1 here. I believe in my case the logical partition key to choose would be "hour" so for example i can sum all the current values from last hour, last 2 hours and so on. In this case i am referring to this post . If i create hour as a partition key for example all the data for lets say the 15th hour of the day will go in this row
2015-08-06 15:00:00
and the data for the next hour will go to 2015-08-06 16:00:00. However lets say the current time is 2015-08-06 16:12:43 and i want to select records from last hour how will my query look like because part of the data is in 2015-08-06 15:00:00 which will have a different primary key
Try the following option. ( I have correct the answer)
Design for your queries. Here, possible queries I could see other than upto minute
Get sum for day
Get sum for hour
Get sum for last hour (any time on the hour)
CREATE TABLE mykeyspace.price (
day text,
hour text,
inserttime timeuuid,
current float,
PRIMARY KEY ((day, hour), inserttime)
) WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (inserttime DESC)
Make 2 insert for every transaction like below
insert into price (day, hour , inserttime , current ) VALUES ('20150813','',now(),2.00)
insert into price (day, hour , inserttime , current ) VALUES ('',’ 2015081317',now(),2.00)
Where
day is YYYYMMDD
hour YYYYMMDDhhmmss (2015081317)
Select Query to get last hour at any minute: Use minTimeuuid and maxTimeuuid
select day,hour,dateOf(inserttime) from price where day = 0 and hour IN ( 2015081317, 2015081316) and inserttime > maxTimeuuid('2015-08-13 16:20:00-0500') and inserttime < minTimeuuid('2015-08-13 17:20:00-0500');
Note: Range query is not allowed on a partition key, although documentation says you could use token function but the results are not predictable.
This is not logical as it just creates one big table and i dont think this will distribute data to other nodes.
Yes, this won't distribute data across you nodes.
Here what I think solution should be
CREATE TABLE IF NOT EXISTS HAS.Price (
Time_uuid timeuuid,
Current float,
PRIMARY KEY (Time_uuid)
);
Then simply find start hour time_uuid and end hour time_uuid and write query like
`SELECT * FROM HAS.Price WHERE time_uuid>=cdb36860-4444-11e5-8080-808080808080 AND time_uuid<=f784b8ef-450d-11e5-7f7f-7f7f7f7f7f7f`
We use cassandra wide rows heavily to store per user time-series as they are perfect for that use-case. Let's assume we have a table:
create table user_events (
user_id text,
timestmp timestamp,
event text,
primary key((user_id), timestmp));
What if clashes on timestamp may happen (same user can emit two different events with the same timestamp). What is the best way to tweak this schema to resolve that assuming we have an ordering for all events present (have a sequence int for each event).
If I modify schema the following way:
create table user_events (
user_id text,
timestmp timestamp,
seq int,
event text,
primary key((user_id), timestmp, seq));
I won’t be able to do WHERE user_id = ? ORDER BY timestmp ASC, seq ASC – cassandra does not allow that.
I won’t be able to do WHERE user_id = ? ORDER BY timestmp ASC, seq ASC – cassandra does not allow that.
You might be seeing an error because you are repeating ASC. This should work:
WHERE user_id = ? ORDER BY timestmp,seq ASC
Also, as long as you have defined your primary key as PRIMARY KEY((user_id),timestmp,seq)) you don't even need to specify ORDER BY x[,y] ASC. It will cluster the data on disk in that order, and thus return it to you already sorted in that order. ORDER BY should only be necessary when you want to put your results in descending order (or whatever the opposite of how you have it defined is).
What if clashes on timestamp may happen?
I think your extra seq column should be sufficient, depending on how you plan on inserting the data. If you are setting the timestmp from the client, then you should be ok. However, look what happens when I (using your second table) INSERT rows while creating the timestamp two different ways.
INSERT INTO user_events(user_id,timestmp,seq,event) VALUES ('Mal',dateof(now()),1,'commanding');
INSERT INTO user_events(user_id,timestmp,seq,event) VALUES ('Wash',dateof(now()),1,'piloting');
INSERT INTO user_events(user_id,timestmp,seq,event) VALUES ('River',dateof(now()),1,'freaking out');
INSERT INTO user_events(user_id,timestmp,seq,event) VALUES ('River',dateof(now()),3,'being weird');
INSERT INTO user_events(user_id,timestmp,seq,event) VALUES ('River',dateof(now()),2,'killing reavers');
INSERT INTO user_events(user_id,timestmp,seq,event) VALUES ('River','2015-01-13 13:14-0600',1,'freaking out');
INSERT INTO user_events(user_id,timestmp,seq,event) VALUES ('River','2015-01-13 13:14-0600',3,'being weird');
INSERT INTO user_events(user_id,timestmp,seq,event) VALUES ('River','2015-01-13 13:14-0600',2,'killing reavers');
Querying that data by a user_id of "River" yields:
aploetz#cqlsh:stackoverflow> SELECT * FROM user_events WHERE user_id='River';
user_id | timestmp | seq | event
---------+--------------------------+-----+-----------------
River | 2015-01-13 13:14:00-0600 | 1 | freaking out
River | 2015-01-13 13:14:00-0600 | 2 | killing reavers
River | 2015-01-13 13:14:00-0600 | 3 | being weird
River | 2015-01-14 12:58:41-0600 | 1 | freaking out
River | 2015-01-14 12:58:57-0600 | 3 | being weird
River | 2015-01-14 12:58:57-0600 | 2 | killing reavers
(6 rows)
Notice that using the now() function to generate a timeuuid, and then converting that to a timestamp with dateof() causes the two rows with the timestmp "2015-01-14 12:58:57-0600" to appear to be the same. But they are not the same, as you can tell by the seq column.
So just a bit of caution on using/generating timestamps. They might look the same, but they may not be stored as the same value. Just to be on the safe side, I would use a timeuuid instead.