I want to create a MVCCKey with a timestamp and pretty value I know. But I realize a roachpb.key is not very straightforward; is there some prefix/suffix involved? Is the database name is also encoded in roachpb.key?
Can anyone please tell me how a MVCCKey is formed? What information does it have? In the documentation, it just says that it looks like /table/primary/key/column.
An engine.MVCCKey combines a regular key with a timestamp. MVCCKeys are encoded into byte strings for use as RockDB keys (RocksDB is configured with a custom comparator so MVCCKeys are sorted correctly even though the timestamp uses a variable-width encoding).
Regular keys are byte strings of type roachpb.Key. For ordinary data records, the keys are constructed from table, column, and index IDs, along with the values of indexed columns. (The database ID is not included here; the database to which a table belongs can be found in the system.descriptors table)
The function keys.PrettyPrint can convert a roachpb.Key to a human-readable form.
Related
I have column in my database that stores BLOB.
I want to run a query to check if specific byte array value is present in the table.
The value is b'\xf4\x8f\xc6{\xc2mH(\x97\x9c\x83hkE\x8b\x95' (python bytes).
I tried to run this query:
SELECT * from received_message
WHERE "EphemeralID"
LIKE HEX('\xf4\x8f\xc6{\xc2mH(\x97\x9c\x83hkE\x8b\x95');
But I get 0 results though I 100% sure that I store this value in the database.
Is there something wrong with my query?
Your search string is a bit weird-- you appear to have some complex things in there like { and (. Maybe you should search through the blob the way it is stored instead?
From the Sqlite documentation:
BLOB literals are string literals containing hexadecimal data and
preceded by a single "x" or "X" character. Example: X'53514C697465'
So maybe do a like with the ascii representation of the hex value you want? Maybe start with looking for just f48f or F48F if your sqlite stores it upper case.
I've got read-only access to a database containing two schema with tables like this:
schema1.A.unique_id, schema1.A.content
schema2.B.unique_id, schema2.B.content
A.unique_id and B.unique_id will match while A.content and B.content are *LOB columns that should match (wasn't my idea lol). What I'd like to do is compare the contents of the content fields and see how many are equal. However, one is a CLOB and one is a BLOB.
DBMS_LOB.COMPARE() is an obvious helper, however it only compares two *LOBs of the same type (e.g. CLOB vs. CLOB).
In lieu of writing a script to get the content of the fields and compare them in memory, how can I perform this comparison in straight-up PL/SQL? Is there some way I can convert one of the fields on-the-fly so that the types match (again keep in mind I only have read-only access)?
Thanks!
I'm trying to store a List as a DynamoDB attribute but I need to be able to retrieve the list order. At the moment the only solution I have come up with is to create a custom hash map by appending a key to the value and converting the complete value to a String and then store that as a list.
eg. key = position1, value = value1, String to be stored in the DB = "position1#value1"
To use the list I then need to filter out, organise, substring and reconvert to the original type. It seems like a long way round but at the moment its the only solution I can come up with.
Does anybody have any better solutions or ideas?
The List type in the newly added Document Types should help.
Document Data Types
DynamoDB supports List and Map data types, which can be nested to represent complex data structures.
A List type contains an ordered collection of values.
A Map type contains an unordered collection of name-value pairs.
Lists and maps are ideal for storing JSON documents. The List data type is similar to a JSON array, and the Map data type is similar to a JSON object. There are no restrictions on the data types that can be stored in List or Map elements, and the elements do not have to be of the same type.
I don't believe it is possible to store an ordered list as an attribute, as DynamoDB only supports single-valued and (unordered) set attributes. However, the performance overhead of storing a string of comma-separated values (or some other separator scheme) is probably pretty minimal given the fact that all the attributes for row must together be under 64KB.
(source: http://docs.amazonwebservices.com/amazondynamodb/latest/developerguide/DataModel.html)
Add a range attribute to your primary keys.
Composite Primary Key for Range Queries
A composite primary key enables you to specify two attributes in a table that collectively form a unique primary index. All items in the table must have both attributes. One serves as a “hash partition attribute” and the other as a “range attribute.” For example, you might have a “Status Updates” table with a composite primary key composed of “UserID” (hash attribute, used to partition the workload across multiple servers) and a “Time” (range attribute). You could then run a query to fetch either: 1) a particular item uniquely identified by the combination of UserID and Time values; 2) all of the items for a particular hash “bucket” – in this case UserID; or 3) all of the items for a particular UserID within a particular time range. Range queries against “Time” are only supported when the UserID hash bucket is specified.
What are they and how do they work?
Where are they used?
When should I (not) use them?
I've heard the word over and over again, yet I don't know its exact meaning.
What I heard is that they allow associative arrays by sending the array key through a hash function that converts it into an int and then uses a regular array. Am I right with that?
(Notice: This is not my homework; I go too school but they teach us only the BASICs in informatics)
Wikipedia seems to have a pretty nice answer to what they are.
You should use them when you want to look up values by some index.
As for when you shouldn't use them... when you don't want to look up values by some index (for example, if all you want to ever do is iterate over them.)
You've about got it. They're a very good way of mapping from arbitrary things (keys) to arbitrary things (values). The idea is that you apply a function (a hash function) that translates the key to an index into the array where you store the values; the hash function's speed is typically linear in the size of the key, which is great when key sizes are much smaller than the number of entries (i.e., the typical case).
The tricky bit is that hash functions are usually imperfect. (Perfect hash functions exist, but tend to be very specific to particular applications and particular datasets; they're hardly ever worthwhile.) There are two approaches to dealing with this, and each requires storing the key with the value: one (open addressing) is to use a pre-determined pattern to look onward from the location in the array with the hash for somewhere that is free, the other (chaining) is to store a linked list hanging off each entry in the array (so you do a linear lookup over what is hopefully a short list). The cases of production code where I've read the source code have all used chaining with dynamic rebuilding of the hash table when the load factor is excessive.
Good hash functions are one way functions that allow you to create a distributed value from any given input. Therefore, you will get somewhat unique values for each input value. They are also repeatable, such that any input will always generate the same output.
An example of a good hash function is SHA1 or SHA256.
Let's say that you have a database table of users. The columns are id, last_name, first_name, telephone_number, and address.
While any of these columns could have duplicates, let's assume that no rows are exactly the same.
In this case, id is simply a unique primary key of our making (a surrogate key). The id field doesn't actually contain any user data because we couldn't find a natural key that was unique for users, but we use the id field for building foreign key relationships with other tables.
We could look up the user record like this from our database:
SELECT * FROM users
WHERE last_name = 'Adams'
AND first_name = 'Marcus'
AND address = '1234 Main St'
AND telephone_number = '555-1212';
We have to search through 4 different columns, using 4 different indexes, to find my record.
However, you could create a new "hash" column, and store the hash value of all four columns combined.
String myHash = myHashFunction("Marcus" + "Adams" + "1234 Main St" + "555-1212");
You might get a hash value like AE32ABC31234CAD984EA8.
You store this hash value as a column in the database and index on that. You now only have to search one index.
SELECT * FROM users
WHERE hash_value = 'AE32ABC31234CAD984EA8';
Once we have the id for the requested user, we can use that value to look up related data in other tables.
The idea is that the hash function offloads work from the database server.
Collisions are not likely. If two users have the same hash, it's most likely that they have duplicate data.
In one SqLite table, I have a BLOB column for saving images (or binary data as a matter of fact). The table is Documents.
Strangely, in Subsonic's ActiveRecord's Documents class, the type of that column shows as STRING which doesn't make sense. It should be byte array. Right?
What am I missing here? How do I map SqLite BLOB column in Subsonic?
SQLite, believe it or not, does not have typed columns. Any data can be stored in any column (except INTEGER PK), regardless of how that column was declared. Each column has an "affinity", and that's what's reported to front ends that query the column's data type. In SQLite, the affinity for a BLOB column is returned as TEXT.
You can read more about it here.