Hi, I'm using it as a complement of cassandra, to avoid "duplicate"
searches and duplicate content in a given moment in time.
It works really nice by now, no critical issues, at least the
functionallity I'm using from it.
--
//GK
german.kond...@gmail.com
// sites
http://twitter.com/germanklf
http
ne a comparison to
> zookeeper? does zookeeper provide functionality over hazelcast?
>
> On 12/10/2010 11:08 AM, Norman Maurer wrote:
>>
>> Hi there,
>>
>> I'm not using it atm but plan to in my next project. It really looks nice
>> :)
>>
>> Bye
Be careful with the unlimited value on ulimit, you could end up with a
unresponsive server... I mean, you could not even connect via ssh if you
don't have enough handles.
On Thu, Dec 16, 2010 at 9:59 AM, Amin Sakka, Novapost <
amin.sa...@novapost.fr> wrote:
>
> I increased the amount of the allow
Indeed Hector has a connection pool behind it, I think it uses 50
connectios per node.
But also uses a node to discover the others, I assume that, as I saw
connections from my app to nodes that I didn't configure in Hector.
So, you may check the fds in OS level to see if there is a bottleneck ther
Hmm... what about just paying for it?
It cost less than $20 on Amazon for the Kindle version...
(http://www.amazon.com/Cassandra-Definitive-Guide-Eben-Hewitt/dp/1449390412).
// Germán Kondolf
http://twitter.com/germanklf
http://code.google.com/p/seide/
// @iPad
On 30/12/2010, at 01:26, asil
Maybe it could be taken into account when the compaction is executed,
if I only have a consecutive list of uninterrupted tombstones it could
only care about the first. It sounds like the-way-it-should-be, maybe
as a part of the "row-reduce" process.
Is it feasible? Looking into the CASSANDRA-1074
take the first timestamp against the gc-grace-seconds when is reducing
& compacting.
// Germán Kondolf
http://twitter.com/germanklf
http://code.google.com/p/seide/
// @i4
On 19/01/2011, at 00:16, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> If you mean that multiple tombstones for the same row or column should
>
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 12:59 AM, Zhu Han wrote:
>
>
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:35 AM, Germán Kondolf
> wrote:
>>
>> Yes, that's what I meant, but correct me if I'm wrong, when a deletion
>> comes after another deletion for the same row or column will
On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 11:52 AM, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
> On Wed, Jan 19, 2011 at 6:41 AM, Germán Kondolf
> wrote:
>> As the original example depicted clearly:
>> day 1 -> insert Row1.Col1
>> day 2 -> delete Row1.Col1
>> day 11 (before gc-grace-seconds) -
