Thanks for your response Jack.
We are already sold on distributed databases, HA and scaling. We just have
some small deployments coming up where there's no money for servers to run
multiple Cassandra nodes.
So, aside from the lack of HA, I'm asking if a single Cassandra node would
be viable in a
ot of code.
For these small sites, we need to scale *down*, not up.
Like it says in Sebastián's email signature "predictably scalable to any
size," only the size this time is smaller, not larger.
--
John Lammers | karoshealth
+1 519 594 0940 x225 | Skype: johnatkaros
7 Fath
er and less flexible than alternatives
>
>
> From: John Lammers
> Reply-To: "user@cassandra.apache.org"
> Date: Friday, January 22, 2016 at 12:57 PM
> To: Cassandra Mailing List
>
> Subject: Fwd: Production with Single Node
>
> Thanks for your reply Se
uldn't have the benefit of full SQL.
How much data (rows, columns), what kind of load pattern (heavy write,
heavy update, heavy query), and what types of queries (primary key-only,
slices, filtering, secondary indexes, etc.)?
-- Jack Krupansky
On Fri, Jan 22, 2016 at 3:24 PM, John Lammers
Thanks for your reply Jonathan.
We chose Cassandra for its incredible performance and robustness for large
sites. Our application is designed from the ground up to take full
advantage of its column oriented data store (giving up the ability to also
run with a relational database backend).
The ch
After deploying a number of production systems with up to 10 Cassandra
nodes each, we are looking at deploying a small, all-in-one-server system
with only a single, local node (Cassandra 2.1.11).
What are the risks of such a configuration?
The virtual disk would be running RAID 5 and the disk con
