Please share exact timeout error message text to get idea what type of timeout
you're facing.
From: Nitan Kainth [mailto:ni...@bamlabs.com]
Sent: Wednesday, June 07, 2017 7:24 AM
To: vasu gunja
Cc: user@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: Local_serial >> Adding nodes
What is in syste
; We are having 2 DC setup each consists of 20 odd nodes and recently we
>>> decided to add 6 more nodes to DC1. We are using LWT's, application
>>> dirvers are configuared to use LOCAL_SERIAL.
>>> As we are adding multiple nodes at a time we used optio
Hi All,
>>
>> We are having 2 DC setup each consists of 20 odd nodes and recently we
>> decided to add 6 more nodes to DC1. We are using LWT's, application
>> dirvers are configuared to use LOCAL_SERIAL.
>> As we are adding multiple nodes at a time we used o
WT's, application dirvers
> are configuared to use LOCAL_SERIAL.
> As we are adding multiple nodes at a time we used option
> "-Dcassandra.consistent.rangemovement=false" we added all nodes with gap of
> 10 mins each
>
> We are facing lot of timeouts more 30k
Hi All,
We are having 2 DC setup each consists of 20 odd nodes and recently we
decided to add 6 more nodes to DC1. We are using LWT's, application
dirvers are configuared to use LOCAL_SERIAL.
As we are adding multiple nodes at a time we used option
"-Dcassandra.consistent.rangemove
On Fri, Dec 9, 2016 at 1:35 AM, Edward Capriolo
wrote:
>
> I copied the wrong issue:
>
> The core issue was this: https://issues.apache.
> org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6123
>
Well, my previous remark applies equally well to this ticket so let me just
copy-paste:
"That ticket has nothing to do with L
t I don't think that means it's never ever useful.
>
> > So, I am not sure about what is the good use case for LOCAL_SERIAL.
>
> Well, a good use case is when you're ok with operations within a
> datacenter to
> be linearizable, but can accept 2 operations in differ
ause registering a new account on some
service takes 500ms.
So yes it's costly, as is most things that willingly depends on cross-DC
latency, but I don't think that means it's never ever useful.
> So, I am not sure about what is the good use case for LOCAL_SERIAL.
Well, a good
takes 52ms just by speed of light in optic cable. Since LightWeight
>> Transaction involves 4 network round-trips, it means at least 200ms just for
>> raw network transfer, not even taking into account the cost of processing
>> the operation
>>
>> You're right to raise a
w York takes 52ms just by speed of light in optic cable. Since
> LightWeight Transaction involves 4 network round-trips, it means at least
> 200ms just for raw network transfer, not even taking into account the cost
> of processing the operation
>
> You're right to raise a w
eight Transaction involves 4 network round-trips, it means at least
200ms just for raw network transfer, not even taking into account the cost
of processing the operation
You're right to raise a warning about mixing LOCAL_SERIAL with SERIAL.
LOCAL_SERIAL guarantees you linearizability inside a
Hi,
I have been using lightweight transactions for several months now and
wondering what is the benefit of having LOCAL_SERIAL serial consistency level.
With SERIAL, it achieves global linearlizability,
but with LOCAL_SERIAL, it only achieves DC-local linearlizability,
which is missing point of
self using Cassandra (local_serial or CAS
would be fine), but it's largely a solved problem, and better tested than a
home grown solution is likely to be. Don't be afraid of hard problems, but
also don't fall prey to NIH syndrome.
On Thu, Oct 15, 2015 at 9:43 AM Jon Haddad wrote:
> ZK
ZK seems a little overkill for just 1 feature though. LOCAL_SERIAL is fine if
all you want to do is keep a handful of keys up to date.
There’s a massive cost in adding something new to your infrastructure, and imo,
very little gain in this case.
> On Oct 15, 2015, at 8:29 AM, Eric Stev
centers and want to coordinate a bunch of services
> in each data center (for example to load data into a per-DC system that is
> not DC-aware (Solr)).
>
> Does it make sense to use CAS functionality with explicit LOCAL_SERIAL to
> 'elect' a leader per data center to do the wo
Hi,
suppose I have two data centers and want to coordinate a bunch of services in
each data center (for example to load data into a per-DC system that is not
DC-aware (Solr)).
Does it make sense to use CAS functionality with explicit LOCAL_SERIAL to
'elect' a leader per data center
16 matches
Mail list logo
