Hello
The load of data on 3 nodes is :
Address DC RackStatus State Load
OwnsToken
113427455640312821154458202477256070485
172.19.10.1 19 10 Up Normal 22.16 GB
33.33% 0
172.19.10.2 19 10 Up Normal 19.89 GB
33.33%
>
> i I will change the data i am storing to decrease the usage , in value i
> will find some small value to store.Previously i used same value since this
> table is index only for search purposed and does not really has value.
If you don't need a value, you don't have to store anything. You can
> Each columns have name of 15 chars ( digits ) and same 15 chars in value
( also digits ).
> Each column should have 30 bytes.
Remember about the standard Cassandra's column overhead which is, as far as
I remember, 15 bytes, so it's 45 bytes in total - 50% more than you
estimated, which kind of m
Hello Mark and thanks for you reply.
1) i store is as UTF8String.All digits are from 0x30 to 0x39 and should
take 1 byte each digit. Since all characters are digits it should have 15
bytes.
2) I will change the data i am storing to decrease the usage , in value i
will find some small value to store
What are you storing these 15 chars as; string, int, double, etc.? 15 chars
does not translate to 15 bytes.
You may be mixing up replication factor and quorum when you say "Cassandra
cluster has 3 servers, and data is stored in quorum ( 2 servers )." You
read and write at quorum (N/2)+1 where N=to
> That is correct. In 0.6, an anticompaction was performed and a temporary
> SSTable was written out to disk, then streamed to the recipient. The way
> this is now done in 0.7 requires no extra disk space on the source node.
Great. So that should at least mean that running out of diskspace
shoul
> Anti-compaction and streaming is done to move data from nodes that
> have it (that are in the replica set). This implies CPU and I/O and
> networking load on the source node, so it does have an impact. See
> http://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/Streaming among others.
>
> (Here's where I'm not sure,
This will be a very selective response, not at all as exhaustive as it
should be to truly cover what you bring up. Sorry, but here goes some
random tidbits.
> On the cassandra user list, I noticed a thread on a user that literally
> wrote his cluster to death. Correct me if I'm wrong, but based o
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 10:10 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> column names are stored per cell
>
> (moving to user@)
>
I think that is already accommodated for in my numbers?
What i listed was measured from the actual SSTable file (using the output
from "strings ), so multiples of the supercolumn
column names are stored per cell
(moving to user@)
On Mon, Aug 30, 2010 at 6:58 AM, Terje Marthinussen
wrote:
> Hi,
>
> Was just looking at a SSTable file after loading a dataset. The data load
> has no updates of data but:
> - Columns can in some rare cases be added to existing super columns
>
10 matches
Mail list logo
