On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 12:05:07PM -0500, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:31 AM, Anthony Molinaro > <antho...@alumni.caltech.edu> wrote: > > > > On Wed, Apr 21, 2010 at 11:08:19AM -0500, Jonathan Ellis wrote: > >> Yes, that looks right, where "token really close" means "slightly less > >> than" (more than would move it into a different node's range). > > > > Is it better to go slightly less than (say Token - 1), or slightly more than > > the beginning of the range (PreviousTokenInRing + 1). I was assuming the > > latter in my earlier email, but you seem to be suggesting the former? > > Right, the former.
So why is Token - 1 better? Doesn't that result in more data movement than PreviousTokenInRing + 1? > > Right, I was mostly wondering if I could speed things up by scping the > > sstables while the system was running (since they shouldn't be changing). > > Then in quick succession removetoken and bootstrap with the old token. > > Probably grasping at straws here :b > > Nope, bootstrap ignores any local data. > > You could use scp-then-repair if you can tolerate slightly out of date > data being served by the new machine until the repair finishes. So with scp-then-repair, what would my config look like? Would I specify the InitialToken as the same as the old token, but have AutoBootstrap set to false? I guess this is interesting to me because I could do something where I migrate my data on a running server to an attached ebs, then after it's synced, detach and re-attach to the new machine. Anyway, thanks for discussing the possibilities, -Anthony -- ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Anthony Molinaro <antho...@alumni.caltech.edu>
