For newcomers that ( https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-3.0.0/guide_8099.md) is probably a bad document to point them to, as it will no doubt confuse them - the naming, behaviour and format descriptions are all now partially incorrect.
It was, by its own admission, intended only for those who already knew the 2.2 codebase intimately so they could understand the 8099 patch. It should really be edited heavily so that those who didn't live through 8099 might now derive value from it. It's a real shame that, despite this document living in-tree, even the class names are out of date - and were before it was even committed. So, as much as CASSANDRA-8700 is a fantastic step forwards, it looks likely to be insufficient by itself, and the project may need to come up with a strategy to encourage maintenance of the docs. On 15 June 2016 at 17:55, Michael Kjellman <mkjell...@internalcircle.com> wrote: > This was forwarded to me yesterday... a helpful first step > https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-3.0.0/guide_8099.md > > > On Jun 15, 2016, at 9:54 AM, Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com> wrote: > > > > Maybe some brave soul will document the 3.0 on disk format as part of > > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8700. > > > > On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 7:02 AM Christopher Bradford < > bradfor...@gmail.com> > > wrote: > > > >> Consider taking a look at Aaron Morton's dive into the C* 3.0 storage > >> engine. > >> > >> > >> > http://thelastpickle.com/blog/2016/03/04/introductiont-to-the-apache-cassandra-3-storage-engine.html > >> > >> On Wed, Jun 15, 2016 at 9:38 AM Jim Witschey <jim.witsc...@datastax.com > > > >> wrote: > >> > >>>> http://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/ArchitectureSSTable > >>> > >>> Be aware that this page hasn't been updated since 2013, so it doesn't > >>> reflect any changes to the SSTable format since then, including the > >>> new storage engine introduced in 3.0 (see CASSANDRA-8099). > >>> > >>> That said, I believe the linked Apache wiki page is the best > >>> documentation for the format. Unfortunately, if you want a better or > >>> more current understanding, you'll have to read the code and read some > >>> SSTables. > >>> > >> > >
