inline...
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 7:46 PM, Hiller, Dean wrote:
> Thanks, (actually new it was configurable) BUT what I don't get is why I
> have to run a repair. IF all nodes became consistent on the delete, it
> should not be possible to get a forgotten delete, correct. The forgotten
> delete w
Oh, and I have been reading Aaron Mortan's article here
http://thelastpickle.com/2011/05/15/Deletes-and-Tombstones/
On 10/1/12 12:46 PM, "Hiller, Dean" wrote:
>Thanks, (actually new it was configurable) BUT what I don't get is why I
>have to run a repair. IF all nodes became consistent on the
Thanks, (actually new it was configurable) BUT what I don't get is why I
have to run a repair. IF all nodes became consistent on the delete, it
should not be possible to get a forgotten delete, correct. The forgotten
delete will only occur if I have a node down and out for 10 days and it
comes ba
the 10 days is actually configurable... look into gc_grace.
Basically, you always need to run repair once per/gc_grace period.
You won't see empty/deleted rows go away until they're compacted away.
On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 6:32 PM, Hiller, Dean wrote:
> I know there is a 10 day limit if you have a
I know there is a 10 day limit if you have a node out of the cluster where you
better be running read-repair or you end up with forgotten deletes, but what
about on a clean cluster with all nodes always available? Shouldn't the
deletes eventually take place or does one have to keep running read
