Re: are repairs in 2.0 more expensive than in 1.2

2014-10-24 Thread Janne Jalkanen
Commented and added a munin graph, if it helps. For the record, I’m happy with -par performance for now. /Janne On 24 Oct 2014, at 18:59, Sean Bridges wrote: > Janne, > > I filed CASSANDRA-8177 [1] for this. Maybe comment on the jira that you are > having the same problem. > > Sean > > [

Re: are repairs in 2.0 more expensive than in 1.2

2014-10-24 Thread Sean Bridges
Janne, I filed CASSANDRA-8177 [1] for this. Maybe comment on the jira that you are having the same problem. Sean [1] https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8177 On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Janne Jalkanen wrote: > > On 23 Oct 2014, at 21:29 , Robert Coli wrote: > > On Thu, Oct

Re: are repairs in 2.0 more expensive than in 1.2

2014-10-23 Thread Robert Coli
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 2:04 PM, Janne Jalkanen wrote: > > If I had known that this had so far been a theoretical problem, I would’ve > spoken up earlier. Perhaps serial repair is not the best default. > Unfortunately you must not hang out in #cassandra on freenode, where I've been ranting^Wcomp

Re: are repairs in 2.0 more expensive than in 1.2

2014-10-23 Thread Janne Jalkanen
On 23 Oct 2014, at 21:29 , Robert Coli wrote: > On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Sean Bridges wrote: > The change from parallel to sequential is very dramatic. For a small cluster > with 3 nodes, using cassandra 2.0.10, a parallel repair takes 2 hours, and > io throughput peaks at 6 mb/s.

Re: are repairs in 2.0 more expensive than in 1.2

2014-10-23 Thread Robert Coli
On Thu, Oct 23, 2014 at 9:33 AM, Sean Bridges wrote: > The change from parallel to sequential is very dramatic. For a small > cluster with 3 nodes, using cassandra 2.0.10, a parallel repair takes 2 > hours, and io throughput peaks at 6 mb/s. Sequential repair takes 40 > hours, with average io

Re: are repairs in 2.0 more expensive than in 1.2

2014-10-23 Thread Sean Bridges
We switched to to parallel repairs, and now our repairs in 2.0 are behaving like the repairs in 1.2. The change from parallel to sequential is very dramatic. For a small cluster with 3 nodes, using cassandra 2.0.10, a parallel repair takes 2 hours, and io throughput peaks at 6 mb/s. Sequential

Re: are repairs in 2.0 more expensive than in 1.2

2014-10-15 Thread Sean Bridges
Thanks Robert. Does the switch to sequential from parallel explain why IO increases, we see significantly higher IO with 2.10. The nodetool docs [1] hint at the reason for defaulting to sequential, "This allows the dynamic snitch to maintain performance for your application via the other replica

Re: are repairs in 2.0 more expensive than in 1.2

2014-10-15 Thread Robert Coli
On Wed, Oct 15, 2014 at 4:54 PM, Sean Bridges wrote: > We upgraded a cassandra cluster from 1.2.18 to 2.0.10, and it looks like > repair is significantly more expensive now. Is this expected? > It depends on what you mean by "expected." Operators usually don't expect defaults with such dramatic