Phone
>
>> On May 25, 2015, at 2:34 AM, graham sanderson wrote:
>>
>> Hey Benedict;
>>
>> I screwed up on email after a bachelor party, and sent something to external
>> cassandra-users not internal users (drunken drivel)
>>
>> I never said
Hey Benedict;
I screwed up on email after a bachelor party, and sent something to external
cassandra-users not internal users (drunken drivel)
I never said anything about it because I hoped no one noticed it.
That said, I was wondering if my data was helpful for your injector post. We
haven’t
porting Inner joins if the partition key is the same in both
>> tables.
>>>
>>> I'd rather see join support personally :)
>>>
>>> Jon
>>>
>>> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 6:38 AM graham sanderson wrote:
>>>
>>>> I 100%
. If we do, we should definitely keep
> it all inline. If not, it probably permits a lot better behaviour to
> separate them, since it's easier to reason about and improve their distinct
> characteristics.
>
>
> On Fri, May 1, 2015 at 1:24 AM, graham sanderson wrote:
>
>>
.
> On Apr 30, 2015, at 7:13 PM, Jonathan Haddad wrote:
>
> If you want it in a separate sstable, just use a separate table. There's
> nothing that warrants making the codebase more complex to accomplish
> something it already does.
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 5:07
th an sstable that's
> almost entirely TTL'ed with a few static columns that will never get
> compacted or dropped. Pretty much the worst scenario I can think of.
>
>
>
> On Thu, Apr 30, 2015 at 11:21 AM graham sanderson <mailto:gra...@vast.com>> wrote:
>
Just as a general observation, there is a third possible solution depending on
the number of columns involved per K1 (which looks reasonable based on your
numbers) but also on how much contention there is for updates to particular
(K1, K2) values (which are always unique partitions in your optio
Running on 2.0.5 we’ve noticed occasional MASSIVE spikes in memory allocation
that happen under write load, but way out of proportion to the amount of data
actually being written.
My suspicion is the problem is related to hinted handoff, and basically follows
the “some sort of non trivial GC pa
There is no regression here yet, however static columns turn out to be insanely
useful (perhaps for reasons other than originally intended), so I am curious
what the general approach is to changes in what is essentially a very new
feature.
In this context, I am showing something that works as i
absence of any
column names prefixed by the partition key
On Jun 24, 2014, at 12:26 AM, graham sanderson wrote:
> Note, that as I think about it, if you had the new OnDiskAtom time with TTL
> and no value, then you wouldn’t need anything special about static columns,
> you’d just need a C
Note, that as I think about it, if you had the new OnDiskAtom time with TTL and
no value, then you wouldn’t need anything special about static columns, you’d
just need a CQL syntax to update/set the TTL for a column which might be useful
for lots of things.
On Jun 24, 2014, at 12:22 AM, graham
So, I was thinking about a new use case, where an ideal situation would be to
have something like
CREATE TABLE series {
id uuid,
inserted timeuuid,
small_thing blob,
large_static_thing blob static,
PRIMARY KEY (id, inserted)
}
So this is my first use of st
memtable under offheap_objects (again dependent on
> workload, but as much as 8x in extreme cases) which means more queries are
> answerable from memtable, and write amplification is reduced accordingly,
> improving write throughput.
> On 15 Jun 2014 13:32, "graham sanderson" wrot
), so I don't expect this change will be
> introduced until zero-copy offheap memtables are introduced, which have
> been shelved for the moment.
>
>
> On 15 Jun 2014 10:53, "graham sanderson" wrote:
>
>> Hi Benedict,
>>
>> So I had a look at t
ile a ticket for that, although
> it won't be back ported to 2.0.
>
>
> On 21 May 2014 00:57, graham sanderson wrote:
>
>> So i’ve been tinkering a bit with CMS config because we are still seeing
>> fairly frequent full compacting GC due to framgentation/promotion
of objects at the same time, however any time slabs are allocated
>> under load, we end up promoting them with whatever other live stuff in eden
>> is still there. If we only do this once and reuse the slabs, we are likely
>> to minimize our promotion problem later (at least for th
in eden is still there.
If we only do this once and reuse the slabs, we are likely to minimize our
promotion problem later (at least for these large objects)
On May 16, 2014, at 9:37 PM, graham sanderson wrote:
> Excellent - thank you…
>
> On May 16, 2014, at 7:08 AM, Samuel CA
Excellent - thank you…
On May 16, 2014, at 7:08 AM, Samuel CARRIERE wrote:
> Hi,
> This is arena allocation of memtables. See here for more infos :
> http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/whats-new-in-cassandra-1-0-performance
>
>
>
>
> De :graham
So just throwing this out there for those for whom this might ring a bell.
I’m debugging some CMS memory fragmentation issues on 2.0.5 - and interestingly
enough most of the objects giving us promotion failures are of size 131074
(dwords) - GC logging obviously doesn’t say what those are, but I’
thanks
On Feb 22, 2014, at 6:06 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> I've attached mine to https://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/CodeStyle.
>
> On Fri, Feb 21, 2014 at 5:37 PM, graham sanderson wrote:
>> Does anyone have IDEA already configured with Cassandra coding style
>>
Does anyone have IDEA already configured with Cassandra coding style (without
using the eclipse formatting plugin)… If so could they please export them and
attach?
Thanks,
Graham
P.S. otherwise I’ll go thru and set them up, and attach myself for others to
use.
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME c
I’ve seen a few JIRA issues here and there, but haven’t heard much about any
goal towards more context in error reporting. For almost all of the errors we
see in production, it would be useful to include KS/CF in the error (and from
the code that information is available in most cases). We have
Thank you.
On Dec 14, 2013, at 9:57 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> Done
>
> On Sat, Dec 14, 2013 at 11:28 AM, graham sanderson wrote:
>> This seemed to get introduced (by mistake?) in ef33f9543
>
>
>
> --
> Jonathan Ellis
> Project Chair, Ap
This seemed to get introduced (by mistake?) in ef33f9543
smime.p7s
Description: S/MIME cryptographic signature
as how it's off by default, the default max_cold_reads_ratio is 0.0,
> so filterColdSSTables() won't actually filter anything. I can add a check
> to skip that function if maxColdReadsRatio is 0.0 in the 6483 patch.
>
>
> On Thu, Dec 12, 2013 at 7:00 PM, graham sanders
I just created https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6483 for an
issue introduced it seems by
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6109
Note that the latter feature claims to be “off” by default, however it isn’t
immediately clear to me from the patch how that “off” is impl
26 matches
Mail list logo
