http://twitter.com/nk/status/17903187277
Another "not using" joke?
That is an interesting statistic. 1 TB per node?
Care to share any more info on the specs of this cluster? Drive types/Cores
per node/etc...
-JD
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 12:01 PM, Prashant Malik wrote:
> This is a ridiculous statement by some newbie I guess , We today have a 150
> node Cassandra
orage solution. J
>
>
>
> Thanks and Regards.
>
>
>
> From: Prashant Malik [mailto:pma...@gmail.com]
> Sent: Tuesday, July 06, 2010 5:36 PM
> To: user@cassandra.apache.org; b...@dehora.net
> Subject: Re: Digg 4 Preview on TWiT
>
>
&g
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 8:13 PM, Matt Su wrote:
> This thread make us raised a concern: we choose Cassandra because
> FB,Twitter,Digg are using them, and we’re doubting whether Cassandra is
> definitely trustable.
If cassandra is definitely trustable is something that you have to
find by yourself,
Nice to hear, 150 nodes is quite a lot. I have another question on the
topic: I've read that most of the data in facebook is stored as
key=>value -pairs which are cached to memcached layer and then stored
to mysql as simple key-value -pairs for persistence (so no relations
in mysql). Are you still
On Jul 6, 2010, at 6:18 PM, David Strauss wrote:
> Then I'll tell my friend at Facebook to stick to topics he's qualified
> to speak about. :-)
You might want to clarify that this advice applies to all topics of discussion
and not just Facebook related ones. ;)
--Joe
Then I'll tell my friend at Facebook to stick to topics he's qualified
to speak about. :-)
On 2010-07-06 13:21, Avinash Lakshman wrote:
> FB Inbox Search still runs on Cassandra and will continue to do so. I
> should know since I maintain it :).
>
> Cheers
> Avinash
>
> On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3
2010 5:36 PM
To: user@cassandra.apache.org; b...@dehora.net
Subject: Re: Digg 4 Preview on TWiT
I have gone through the appropriate channel here at FB to make sure that
the correct information is presented.
the article has now been updated to
" (Update: just for reference, we're tol
I have gone through the appropriate channel here at FB to make sure that
the correct information is presented.
the article has now been updated to
" (*Update*: just for reference, we’re told via email that Facebook, “no
longer contributes to nor uses Cassandra.” *Update 2*: we are now being to
Nonetheless, thanks for clearing that one up. And that's some serious
volume you've got there :)
Bill
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 12:01 -0700, Prashant Malik wrote:
> This is a ridiculous statement by some newbie I guess , We today have
> a 150 node Cassandra cluster running Inbox search supporting clo
Thanks Avinash
It's sad to see engineers ready to switch from one solution to another,
simply because they hear rumors about Facebook or some other large website
moving away from it. The part the really bothers me is how people were ready
to look for an alternative solution before they even verifi
This is a ridiculous statement by some newbie I guess , We today have a 150
node Cassandra cluster running Inbox search supporting close to 500M users
and over 150TB of data growing rapidly everyday.
I am on pager for this monster :) so its pretty funny to hear this
statement.
- Prashant
On Tue
FB Inbox Search still runs on Cassandra and will continue to do so. I should
know since I maintain it :).
Cheers
Avinash
On Tue, Jul 6, 2010 at 3:34 AM, David Strauss wrote:
> On 2010-07-05 15:40, Eric Evans wrote:
> > On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 13:14 +0100, Bill de hÓra wrote:
> >> This person's und
On Tue, 2010-07-06 at 05:59 -0500, Colin Clark wrote:
> What were the right questions? I view Facebook's move away from
> Cassandra as somewhat significant.
For here, I guess it's only significant if there are interesting
technical reasons. I find Cassandra's design tradeoffs close to optimal,
so
What were the right questions? I view Facebook's move away from
Cassandra as somewhat significant.
And are they indeed using HBase then, and if so, what were the right
answers?
On 7/6/2010 5:34 AM, David Strauss wrote:
On 2010-07-05 15:40, Eric Evans wrote:
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 13:14
On 2010-07-05 15:40, Eric Evans wrote:
> On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 13:14 +0100, Bill de hÓra wrote:
>> This person's understanding is that Facebook 'no longer contributes to
>> nor uses Cassandra.':
>>
>> http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2010/05/17/beyond-cassandra/
>
> Last I heard, Facebook was still usin
On Sun, 2010-07-04 at 13:14 +0100, Bill de hÓra wrote:
> This person's understanding is that Facebook 'no longer contributes to
> nor uses Cassandra.':
>
> http://redmonk.com/sogrady/2010/05/17/beyond-cassandra/
Last I heard, Facebook was still using Cassandra for what they had
always used it for
Agreed, what exactly did they replace it with.
On Sun, Jul 4, 2010 at 8:14 AM, Bill de hÓra wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 11:51 -0500, Eric Evans wrote:
> > On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 07:53 -0700, Kochheiser,Todd W - TOK-DITT-1 wrote:
> > > On a related but separate note: While I am fairly new to Ca
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 11:51 -0500, Eric Evans wrote:
> On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 07:53 -0700, Kochheiser,Todd W - TOK-DITT-1 wrote:
> > On a related but separate note: While I am fairly new to Cassandra and
> > have only been following the mailing lists for a few months, the
> > conversation with Kevin
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Chris Goffinet wrote:
> Digg is not forking Cassandra. We use 0.6 for production, with a few
> in-house patches (related to our infrastructure). The biggest difference
> with our branch and apache 0.6 branch is we have the work Kelvin and Twitter
> has done in rega
On Mon, 2010-06-28 at 07:53 -0700, Kochheiser,Todd W - TOK-DITT-1 wrote:
> On a related but separate note: While I am fairly new to Cassandra and
> have only been following the mailing lists for a few months, the
> conversation with Kevin Rose on TWiT made me curious if the versions
> of Cassandra
If you're interested:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1072
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-580
-Kelvin
On Mon, Jun 28, 2010 at 9:35 AM, Chris Goffinet wrote:
> Digg is not forking Cassandra. We use 0.6 for production, with a few
> in-house patches (related to our
Digg is not forking Cassandra. We use 0.6 for production, with a few in-house
patches (related to our infrastructure). The biggest difference with our branch
and apache 0.6 branch is we have the work Kelvin and Twitter has done in
regards to Vector Clocks + Distributed Counters. This will never
23 matches
Mail list logo
