Re: Correct way to set ByteOrderedPartitioner initial tokens

> I have 4 Nodes, and I'd like to store all keys starting with 'a' on node 1, > 'b' on 2, and so on. Can I ask why ? In general you *really* dont want to use the ByteOrderedPartitioner. If you are starting out, you will have a happier time if you start with th

Correct way to set ByteOrderedPartitioner initial tokens

I have 4 Nodes, and I'd like to store all keys starting with 'a' on node 1, 'b' on 2, and so on.My keys just start with a letter and numbers follow, like 'a150', 'b1','c32000'.I've set the initial tokens to 61ff, 62ff ,63ff, 64ff .This does not seem to be the correct way.Thanks.

Re: need help with choosing correct tokens for ByteOrderedPartitioner

ranges - then two md5(member_id1) & md5(member_id2) end up very close so using md5(member_id1)+mmdd & md5(member_id2)+mmdd will cause range overlaps with ByteOrderedPartitioner. Thanks Alex Le lundi 28 novembre 2011, Piavlo <mailto:lolitus...@gmail.com>> a écrit :

Re: need help with choosing correct tokens for ByteOrderedPartitioner

You may want to add 29991231 instead of appending. Le lundi 28 novembre 2011, Piavlo a écrit : > Anyone can help with this? > > Thanks > > On 11/24/2011 11:55 AM, Piavlo wrote: >> >> Hi, >> >> We need help with choosing correct tokens for ByteOrdered

Re: need help with choosing correct tokens for ByteOrderedPartitioner

Anyone can help with this? Thanks On 11/24/2011 11:55 AM, Piavlo wrote: Hi, We need help with choosing correct tokens for ByteOrderedPartitioner Originally the key where supposed to be member_id-mmdd but since we need to male rage scans on same member_id and varying date ranges

need help with choosing correct tokens for ByteOrderedPartitioner

Hi, We need help with choosing correct tokens for ByteOrderedPartitioner Originally the key where supposed to be member_id-mmdd but since we need to male rage scans on same member_id and varying date ranges mmdd we decided to use ByteOrderedPartitioner, so we need that same member

Re: ByteOrderedPartitioner token generation

So I want the interaction among Cassandra servers be minimum. I think that > the best way to do this is to use ByteOrderedPartitioner and generate ID of > new data based on the InitialToken of servers and send data to the > corresponding server from the webserver. Am I right? > &g

ByteOrderedPartitioner token generation

I need to insert a large amount of data to Cassandra cluster in a short time. So I want the interaction among Cassandra servers be minimum. I think that the best way to do this is to use ByteOrderedPartitioner and generate ID of new data based on the InitialToken of servers and send data to

Re: ByteOrderedPartitioner

heers - Aaron Morton Freelance Cassandra Developer @aaronmorton http://www.thelastpickle.com On 17/09/2011, at 11:25 AM, Daning Wang wrote: > How is the performance of ByteOrderedPartitioner, compared to > RandomPartitioner? the perforamnce when getting data with single key, does it

ByteOrderedPartitioner

How is the performance of ByteOrderedPartitioner, compared to RandomPartitioner? the perforamnce when getting data with single key, does it use same algorithm? I have read that the downside of ByteOrderedPartitioner is creating hotspot. But if I have 4 nodes and I set RF to 4, that will replicate

Re: set up a cassandra cluster with ByteOrderedPartitioner using whirr?

On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:57 AM, Khanh Nguyen wrote: > Hi, > > I'm struggling to set up a cassandra cluster with > ByteOrderedPartitioner using whirr. (I'm not sure if the issue is > caused by Cassandra or Whirr so I cc-ed both lists). > > Here are the steps I

set up a cassandra cluster with ByteOrderedPartitioner using whirr?

Hi, I'm struggling to set up a cassandra cluster with ByteOrderedPartitioner using whirr. (I'm not sure if the issue is caused by Cassandra or Whirr so I cc-ed both lists). Here are the steps I took - use whirr to lauch a cassandra (version 0.8) cluster - ssh into each instances and

Re: Generating tokens for Cassandra cluster with ByteOrderedPartitioner

:35, Matthew Tovbin wrote: > Hey, > > Can anyone suggest me how to manually generate tokens for Cassandra 0.7.0 > cluster, while ByteOrderedPartitioner is being used? > > Thanks in advance. > > -- > Best regards, > Matthew Tovbin.

Generating tokens for Cassandra cluster with ByteOrderedPartitioner

Hey, Can anyone suggest me how to manually generate tokens for Cassandra 0.7.0 cluster, while ByteOrderedPartitioner is being used? Thanks in advance. -- Best regards, Matthew Tovbin.

Re: Range scan returns more results then expected (Using ByteOrderedPartitioner)

I see, now it makes perfect sense. Thank you. On Mon, Jan 24, 2011 at 11:05 PM, Aaron Morton wrote: > It's not pattern matching, it's comparing / ordering the byte values. You > are asking to return 100 keys in ascending order where the value of the key > (after the partitioner has been applied)

Re: Range scan returns more results then expected (Using ByteOrderedPartitioner)

It's not pattern matching, it's comparing / ordering the byte values. You are asking to return 100 keys in ascending order where the value of the key (after the partitioner has been applied) is greater than "1_265_8_12" If you want to do a seek and partial scan, you could use an end value in the li

Range scan returns more results then expected (Using ByteOrderedPartitioner)

Hello, Cassandra is configure as following: conf/cassandra.yaml | grep 'partitioner:' partitioner: org.apache.cassandra.dht.ByteOrderedPartitioner Why yet doing range query on part of the key return more results then expected (column, CF and keyspace names masked): [default@KEYSPACE] list CF1