gt; thousands of nodes. It's a totally different situation today.
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 5, 2018 at 11:17 AM benjamin roth wrote:
>
> > That would be totally awesome!
> >
> > Not sure if it helps here but for completeness:
> > We completely "dumped" re
That would be totally awesome!
Not sure if it helps here but for completeness:
We completely "dumped" regular repairs - no matter if 'nodetool repair' or
reaper - and run our own tool that does simply CL_ALL scraping over the
whole cluster.
It runs now for over a year in production and the only pr
+1
2017-07-27 9:26 GMT+02:00 Marco Massenzio :
> Why not simply have a microservice that does this for you?
>
> It may expose an API that allows to either store queries and/or conditions
> that trigger the queries (maybe time elapsed, an alert generated,
> whatever...) and it would then connect t
Hi Josh,
Who is "we" in this case?
Best,
Ben
2017-07-24 15:41 GMT+02:00 Josh McKenzie :
> >
> > The initial contributors turned their back on MVs
>
>
> We're working on the following MV-related issues in the 4.0 time-frame:
> CASSANDRA-13162
> CASSANDRA-13547
> CASSANDRA-13127
>
Hi Kurt,
First of all thanks for this elaborate post.
At this moment, I don't want to come up with a solution for all MV issues
but I would like to point out, why I was quite active some time ago and why
I pulled myself back.
As you also mentioned in different words, it seems to me that MVs are
Absolutely
+ Separate repos for separate modules also separate responsibility. IMHO it
makes a heterogenuous structure more manageable. Both in a technical and a
human or insitutional way.
2017-05-15 13:54 GMT+02:00 Jonathan Haddad :
> There's a handful of issues I can think of with shipping eve
I am not a PMC member or sth but just my 2 cents:
As long as it is designed from the ground to improve testability, this can
be a big chance.
If not - it will be a big risk.
Theres a huge difference between running a quick hack as a proof of concept
and designing a generic architecture and retain
Isn't there a way to script that with just a few lines of python or
whatever?
2017-03-17 21:03 GMT+01:00 Jeff Jirsa :
>
>
> On 2017-03-17 12:33 (-0700), Stefan Podkowinski wrote:
>
> > As you can see there's a large part about using GitHub for editing on
> > the page. I'd like to know what you t
I think you can refactor any project with little risk and increase test
coverage.
What is needed:
Rules. Discipline. Perseverance. Small iterations. Small iterations. Small
iterations.
- Refactor in the smallest possible unit
- Split large classes into smaller ones. Remove god classes by pul
Contribution Guide +1
Github WebUI +1
Pull requests +1
Rest: Inspect + Adapt
2017-03-13 19:38 GMT+01:00 Stefan Podkowinski :
> Agreed. Let's not give up on this as quickly. My suggestion is to at
> least provide a getting started guide for writing docs, before
> complaining about too few contrib
Hm maybe a different theme / CSS could make it look a little bit more "2017"
https://moinmo.in/HelpOnThemes
2017-03-13 16:27 GMT+01:00 Jeremy Hanna :
> The moinmoin wiki was preferred but because of spam, images couldn’t be
> attached. The options were to use confluence or have a moderated list
First: I am positively surprised how many guys would like to contribute to
docs.
Some days ago I posted to the dev-list about doc-contribution. I think this
applies here again. From my point of view "in-tree docs" are a good choice
for technical references that go closely with the code versioning.
There is a German saying:
Sometimes you don't see the woods because of the lots of trees.
Am 05.03.2017 09:25 schrieb "DuyHai Doan" :
> No problem, distributed systems are hard to reason about, I got caught many
> times in the past
>
> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 9:
Not maybe. You are absolutely right. Bad idea. Hmpf.
Am 05.03.2017 09:23 schrieb "benjamin roth" :
> Sorry. Answer was to fast. Maybe you are right.
>
> Am 05.03.2017 09:21 schrieb "benjamin roth" :
>
>> No. You just change the partitioner. That's al
Sorry. Answer was to fast. Maybe you are right.
Am 05.03.2017 09:21 schrieb "benjamin roth" :
> No. You just change the partitioner. That's all
>
> Am 05.03.2017 09:15 schrieb "DuyHai Doan" :
>
>> "How can that be achieved? I haven't don
find the user_id that corresponds to email
> 'xxx' so that your MV partitioner idea can work ?
>
>
>
> On Sun, Mar 5, 2017 at 9:05 AM, benjamin roth wrote:
>
> > While I was reading the MV paragraph in your post, an idea popped up:
> >
> > The problem with
While I was reading the MV paragraph in your post, an idea popped up:
The problem with MV inconsistencies and inconsistent range movement is that
the "MV contract" is broken. This only happens because base data and
replica data reside on different hosts. If base data + replicas would stay
on the s
Hi,
Can anyone tell the difference between consistent + inconsistent range
movements?
What exactly makes them consistent or inconsistent?
In what situations can both of them occur?
It would be great to get a correct and deep understanding of that for
further MV improvments. My intuition tells me
Sorry - it was my fault. I introduced a bug and was blinded by the tons of
debug output of dtests.
2017-03-01 17:20 GMT+01:00 benjamin roth :
> Hi again,
>
> I wanted to run some dtests (e.g. from materialized_views_test.py) to
> check my changes. A while ago, everything worked fine
Hi again,
I wanted to run some dtests (e.g. from materialized_views_test.py) to check
my changes. A while ago, everything worked fine but today I ran into a lot
of errors like this:
https://gist.github.com/brstgt/114d76769d97dc72059f9252330c4142
This happened on 2 different machines (macos + linu
Hi guys,
I started working on 13066. My intention is to offer a table-setting that
allows a operator to optimize MV streaming in some cases or simply "on
purpose - i know what i do".
MV write path streaming can be ommitted e.g. if:
- data is append only
- no PK is added to MV so no stale data can
; drawbacks. Do you have any example project with a process that we should
> follow instead? Did you have a look at the README file in the docs tree
> and actually try to add or change any content? What would hold you back
> to work from there and submit a patch?
>
>
>
> On 01.0
Hi guys,
Is there a reason that the docs are part of the git repo?
In my personal opinion this is very complicated and it puts the hurdle to
contribute to docs very high.
There are so many questions on userlists that repeat over and over again
and that could be put into a knowledge base.
But ...
wn 10/20/100. In many
> cases, workloads can be throttled and still meet business goals - nightly
> analytics jobs, for example, may be fine running over the course of 3 hours
> instead of 15 minutes, especially if the slightly-higher-response-latency
> over 3 hours is better than mu
Stupid question:
Why do you rate limit a database, especially writes. Wouldn't that cause a
lot of new issues like back pressure on the rest of your system or timeouts
in case of blocking requests?
Also rate limiting has to be based on per coordinator calculations and not
cluster wide. It reminds m
27;d appreciate any kind of support.
Thanks folks!
--
Benjamin Roth
Prokurist
Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
Phone +49 7161 304880-6 · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer
For MVs regarding this threads question only the partition key matters.
Different primary keys can have the same partition key. Which is the case
in the example in your last comment.
Am 10.02.2017 20:26 schrieb "Kant Kodali" :
@Benjamin Roth: How do you say something is a different P
mutations.
2017-02-10 19:58 GMT+01:00 DuyHai Doan :
> See my blog post to understand how MV is implemented:
> http://www.doanduyhai.com/blog/?p=1930
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 7:48 PM, Benjamin Roth
> wrote:
>
> > Same partition key:
> >
> > PRIMARY KEY ((a, b),
rent partition keys according to you right?
>
> PRIMARY KEY ((a, b), c, d) and
> PRIMARY KEY ((a, b), d, c, e)
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:48 AM, Benjamin Roth
> wrote:
>
> > Same partition key:
> >
> > PRIMARY KEY ((a, b), c, d) and
> > PRI
Kodali :
> Okies now I understand what you mean by "same" partition key. I think you
> are saying
>
> PRIMARY KEY(col1, col2, col3) == PRIMARY KEY(col2, col1, col3) // so far I
> assumed they are different partition keys.
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:36 AM, Benj
(which is allowed as of today)
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 10:23 AM, Benjamin Roth
> wrote:
>
> > It depends on your model.
> > If the base table + MV have the same partition key, then the MV mutations
> > are applied synchronously, so they are written as soon the write re
through MV but prior to MV getting the update from the base table.
> so there isn't any way to make sure to read after MV had been successfully
> updated. is that correct?
>
> On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 6:30 AM, Benjamin Roth
> wrote:
>
> > Hi Kant
> >
> > Is it
Hi Kant
Is it clear now?
Sorry for the confusion!
Have a nice one
Am 10.02.2017 09:17 schrieb "Kant Kodali" :
thanks!
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Benjamin Roth
wrote:
> Yes it is
>
> Am 10.02.2017 00:46 schrieb "Kant Kodali" :
>
> > If reading fro
d View. So, you
> cannot apply the R+W>RF formula.
> >
> > >Brian
> >
> >> On Feb 10, 2017, at 3:17 AM, Kant Kodali wrote:
> >>
> >> thanks!
> >>
> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Benjamin Roth
> >> wrote:
>
specify
> a Consistency Level on wrote for the Materialized View. So, you cannot
> apply the R+W>RF formula.
>
> >Brian
>
> > On Feb 10, 2017, at 3:17 AM, Kant Kodali wrote:
> >
> > thanks!
> >
> > On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Be
Yes it is
Am 10.02.2017 00:46 schrieb "Kant Kodali" :
> If reading from materialized view with a consistency level of quorum am I
> guaranteed to have the most recent view? other words is w + r > n contract
> maintained for MV's as well for both reads and writes?
>
> Thanks!
>
Btw this isn't the Bronx either. It's not incorrect to be polite.
Am 07.02.2017 13:45 schrieb "Bernardo Sanchez" <
bernard...@pointclickcare.com>:
> guys this isn't twitter. stop your stupid posts
>
> From: benjamin.le...@datastax.com
> Sent: February 7, 2017 7:43 AM
> To: dev@cassandra.apache.or
w.
> >> > >
> >> > > Therefore, I suggest first that we collectively roll up our
> > sleeves to
> >> > vet
> >> > > 3.10 as the last tick-tock release. Stick a fork in it, it’s
> > done. No
> >> > &g
ter during bootstrap / etc? Any idea of fixing them is a major
> undertaking?
>
> Jon
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 9:39 AM Benjamin Roth
> wrote:
>
> +1 also I appreciate any effort on MV stability. It is an official 3.x
> feature but not production ready for the masses.
+1 also I appreciate any effort on MV stability. It is an official 3.x
feature but not production ready for the masses.
Am 13.01.2017 18:34 schrieb "Jonathan Ellis" :
> +1
>
> On Fri, Jan 13, 2017 at 11:21 AM, Aleksey Yeschenko
> wrote:
>
> > Hi all!
> >
> > It seems like we have a general conse
Grmpf! 1000+ consecutive must be wrong. I guess I mixed sth up. But it
repaired over and over again for 1 or 2 days.
2016-12-07 9:01 GMT+01:00 Benjamin Roth :
> Hi Paolo,
>
> First of all thanks for your review!
>
> I had the same concerns as you but I thought it is beeing hand
urrent behavior for MV streaming originating from
> repair.
> - Create new ticket to include only the base tables and not MVs in
> keyspace-level repair, since repairing the base already repairs the views
> to avoid people shooting themselves in the foot.
>
> Please let me know what
Mon, Dec 5, 2016 at 12:15 PM, Jan wrote:
> > >
> > >> HI Folks;
> > >> is there a way for 'Collecting slow queries' in the Apache Cassandra.
> > ?I
> > >> am aware of the DSE product offering such an option, but need the
> > so
ix them!
>
> [0] https://github.com/riptano/cassandra-dtest/pull/1399
> [1]
> https://issues.apache.org/jira/issues/?jql=project%20%
> 3D%20CASSANDRA%20AND%20labels%20%3D%20test-failure%20AND%
> 20resolution%20%3D%20unresolved
>
> --
> Kind regards,
> Michael Shuler
>
GMT+01:00 Edward Capriolo :
> I think it is fair to run a flakey test again. If it is determine it flaked
> out due to a conflict with another test or something ephemeral in a long
> process it is not worth blocking a release.
>
> Just deleting it is probably not a good path.
>
&
On Mon, Nov 21, 2016 at 11:31 AM sankalp kohli >
> > > wrote:
> > >
> > > > Hi,
> > > > We should not cut a releases if Dtest are not passing. I won't
> > block
> > > > 3.10 on this since we are just discussing this.
> > > >
> > > > Please provide feedback on this.
> > > >
> > > > Thanks,
> > > > Sankalp
> > > >
> > >
> >
>
--
Benjamin Roth
Prokurist
Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
Phone +49 7161 304880-6 · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer
t fixes is immense
and maybe will be a huge step to get MVs production ready.
Thank you very much,
Benjamin
-- Forwarded message ------
From: Benjamin Roth
Date: 2016-11-29 17:04 GMT+01:00
Subject: Streaming and MVs
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
I don't know where else to discuss t
s during that period, not only
the base table
3. Rebuild
Same like bootstrap, isn't it?
Did I forget any cases?
What do you think?
--
Benjamin Roth
Prokurist
Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com
Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany
Phone +49 7161 304880-6 · Fax +49 7161 304880-1
AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer
48 matches
Mail list logo
