On Wed, Nov 16, 2011 at 10:02 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> Sounds like the consensus is that if this is a good idea at all, it
> needs to be opt-in. Like I said earlier, I can live with that.
In addition, if you want to get data from large companies that manage
their own datacenters, there needs
It'd be great if we had different settings for inter- and intra-DC read repair.
-ryan
On Fri, Jul 29, 2011 at 5:06 PM, Jake Luciani wrote:
> Yes it's read repair you can lower the read repair chance to tune this.
>
>
>
> On Jul 29, 2011, at 6:31 PM, Aaron Griffith
> wrote:
>
>> I currently hav
On Sat, Jul 16, 2011 at 12:30 PM, Jeremy Hanna
wrote:
> I don't see a way in DatabaseDescriptor to set the rpc_timeout_in_ms via jmx.
>
> It doesn't seem possible right now.
>
> Is there any reason why that couldn't be set via jmx? It seems like a
> rolling restart to update that is pretty heavy
There's more burden on the user, but with a benefit– client supplied
timestamps mean that client retries are idempotent as long as they use
the same timestamp.*
-ryan
* doesn't apply to counters
On Fri, Jun 17, 2011 at 8:01 AM, Tim Wisniewski wrote:
> it's slightly less burden on the user
>
> O
I think maybe 4 months was too short? Do we optimistically want to try
that again or plan on taking a bit more time?
Either way I'm happy to have a plan. :)
-ryan
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 9:11 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> +1
>
> On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 7:36 AM, Sylvain Lebresne
> wrote:
>> Ladi
On Tue, Jun 14, 2011 at 2:02 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> Sounds a lot like
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1123. The main change
> you'd want is to allow passing an external trace ID.
Yeah, that patch seems like a good start. In addition to passing an
external trace id we need a
I'll open a ticket on this soon, but I'd like to start a discussion first.
We're working on a distributed tracing system, whose design is
somewhat inspired by the Google Dapper paper [1]. We have instrumented
a bunch of our internal services through our custom networking stack
[2].
In a nutshell,
On Fri, Feb 11, 2011 at 8:35 AM, Gary Dusbabek wrote:
> I've been uncomfortable with the amount of features I perceive are
> going into our maintenance releases for a while now. I thought it
> would stop after we committed ourselves to having a more predictable
> major release schedule. But gett
On Thu, Feb 10, 2011 at 2:17 AM, Joshua Partogi wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Does the Ruby library currently returns the RowKey during a row get?
> From what I am seeing it seems like it is only returning an
> OrderedHash of the columns. Would it be possible to return the RowKey,
> or it doesn't make sense to
If you're using 0.7, I'd skip jmx and use the mx4j http interface then
write scripts that convert the data to the format you need.
-ryan
On Wed, Feb 9, 2011 at 2:47 AM, Roland Gude wrote:
> Unfortunately not, as the nagios JMX check expects a numeric return value and
> only allows for defining
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 8:39 AM, Eric Evans wrote:
> On Wed, 2011-01-19 at 10:29 -0600, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 12:36 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
>> > The discussion seems to be petering out and I wonder if that means folks
>> > are still trying to wrap their heads around every
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 7:32 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
>...
> In other words, at some point you have so many production users that
> it's silly to pretend it's ready for 1.0. I'd say we've passed that
> point.
Did you mean to say "silly to pretend it's *not* ready for 1.0"?
Otherwise, I don't un
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 4:04 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Ryan King wrote:
>> # Fixed schedule
>>
>> We should set a fixed schedule and stick to it. Anything features not
>> ready at branch time won't make it and will be disable
ssentially implemented #1072 twice for 0.6 and 0.7)
4, back porting features is risky and causes bugs, esp with the
limited QA available
-ryan
On Thu, Jan 13, 2011 at 2:32 PM, Ryan King wrote:
> I think many believe that shipping 0.7 took longer than it should.
> Rather than going into why th
I think many believe that shipping 0.7 took longer than it should.
Rather than going into why that happened, I'd like to propose a better
way to move forward that will hopefully allow us to ship on a more
predictable schedule. This proposal is heavily influenced by the
google chrome release process
I'm a -1 on naming the next release 1.0 because I don't think it has
the quality that 1.0 implies, but to be honest I don't really care
that much. The version numbers don't really effect those that of use
that are running production clusters. Calling it 1.0 won't make it any
more stable or faster.
+1 non-binding
-ryan
On Thu, Jan 6, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> +1 for reals
> On Jan 6, 2011 11:14 AM, "Eric Evans" wrote:
>>
>> RC 4 seems to be holding up OK, shall we? I propose the following for
>> release as 0.7.0 (aka "For Reals Yo").
>>
>> SVN:
>>
> https://svn.apache.org/
On Wed, Dec 22, 2010 at 11:07 AM, matthew hawthorne
wrote:
> hello,
>
> I'm starting a project at my day job to deploy a gossip protocol
> implementation. part of my initial work is to evaluate existing
> implementations.
>
> being loosely familiar with Cassandra, I read
> http://wiki.apache.org/
On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 9:42 AM, Edward Capriolo wrote:
> On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 11:30 AM, Eric Evans wrote:
>> On Wed, 2010-12-22 at 11:00 -0600, Eric Evans wrote:
>>> So, Avro RPC. Is anyone using this? Is there anyone interested in
>>> seeing it maintained?
>>>
>>> I'm concentrating on CQL[
On Thu, Dec 2, 2010 at 10:57 AM, Paul Querna wrote:
> On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 10:48 PM, Jeremy Hanna
> wrote:
>> Along with Ryan's SF thing I could help organize something in the
>> Austin area if there is interest.
>>
>> Would people like to do a Cassandra test-athon a week from Friday
>> (Decemb
I'd be happy to host a hackathon at Twitter HQ in SF for this. Anyone
interested in that?
-ryan
On Wed, Dec 1, 2010 at 7:18 PM, Jeremy Hanna wrote:
> Perhaps the time could be better spent trying to beef up the integration
> tests and looking for ways to root out potential regressions...
>
> Ba
In the spirit of making sure we have clear communication about our
work, I'd like to outline the use cases Twitter has for distributed
counters. I expect that many of you using Cassandra currently or in
the future will have similar use cases.
The first use case is pretty simple: high scale counter
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 10:14 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 4:00 PM, Sylvain Lebresne wrote:
>> I agree that it is worth adding a support for counter as supercolumns
>> in 1546 and that's fairly trivial, so I will add that as soon as possible
>> (but please understand that I
On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 12:48 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> On Tue, Sep 28, 2010 at 2:25 PM, Ryan King wrote:
>> Sorry, been catching up on this.
>>
>> From Twitter's perspective, 1546 is probably insufficient because it
>> doesn't allow one to do time-se
Sorry, been catching up on this.
>From Twitter's perspective, 1546 is probably insufficient because it
doesn't allow one to do time-series data without supercolumns (which
might work ok, but require a good deal of work). Additionally, one of
our deployed systems already does supercolumns of counte
On Mon, Aug 16, 2010 at 6:07 AM, Maifi Khan wrote:
> Hi
> How is the locking implemented in cassandra? Say, I have 10 nodes and
> I want to write to 6 nodes which is (n+1)/2.
Not to be too pedantic, but you're misunderstanding how to use
cassandra. When we talk about 'n' we mean the number of rep
On Thu, Aug 12, 2010 at 11:21 AM, Jesse McConnell
wrote:
> out of curiosity are you shooting for incrementing these counters 10k
> times a second for sustained periods of time?
Our use cases include 100,000's of increments a second but most of the
values will only be incremented for a relatively
A well-known Bay Area enterprise company we are friendly with is
seeking some Cassandra developers. The target scale is hundreds of
machines per cluster, with a focus on various online data mining and
analytics tasks of a sensitive nature. You would work on developing
and operationalizing Cassandra
Awesome.
-ryan
On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:25 AM, Chris Goffinet wrote:
> Eric,
>
> Great. I fully support this as well, it has been getting a bit noisy :)
>
> On Thu, Mar 25, 2010 at 10:16 AM, Eric Evans wrote:
>
>>
>> Those of you who participate on IRC have probably noticed that we are
>> pre
29 matches
Mail list logo
