it's an interesting idea. i'd wonder how much overhead you'd end up with message parsing and negate any potential GC wins. rick branson had played around a bunch with running storage nodes and doubling down on the old "fat client" model. if you had 10000 tables (yes, barely works but we don't explicitly prevent it) you can't really run that many jvm processes on a single box.
> On Feb 22, 2018, at 12:39 PM, Carl Mueller <carl.muel...@smartthings.com> > wrote: > > GC pauses may have been improved in newer releases, since we are in 2.1.x, > but I was wondering why cassandra uses one jvm for all tables and > keyspaces, intermingling the heap for on-JVM objects. > > ... so why doesn't cassandra spin off a jvm per table so each jvm can be > tuned per table and gc tuned and gc impacts not impact other tables? It > would probably increase the number of endpoints if we avoid having an > overarching query router. --------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: dev-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: dev-h...@cassandra.apache.org
