But doesn't having multiple similarly sized column families mean in-node compaction does not require 50% of disk? Looking at compaction manager, only 1 thread is doing a compaction, so we only need enough free disk space to compact the largest column family.
Sean On Thu, May 27, 2010 at 12:00 AM, gabriele renzi <rff....@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, May 26, 2010 at 8:00 PM, Sean Bridges <sean.brid...@gmail.com> > wrote: > > So after CASSANDRA-579, anti compaction won't be done on the source node, > > and we can use more than 50% of the disk space if we use multiple column > > families? > > Sorry if I misunderstand, but #579 seems to only solve half of your > question, > I believe the first part of your email stays valid (as in: in-node > compaction causes disk usage to double anyway in worst case). > > CASSANDRA-1041 may also be relevant (also includes mini-discussion on > local data partitioning). >
