Thanks for the comments, I guess I will end up doing a 2 node cluster with replica count 2 and read consistency 1.
-- Drew On Mar 15, 2012, at 4:20 PM, Thomas van Neerijnen wrote: > So long as data loss and downtime are acceptable risks a one node cluster is > fine. > Personally this is usually only acceptable on my workstation, even my dev > environment is redundant, because servers fail, usually when you least want > them to, like for example when you've decided to save costs by waiting before > implementing redundancy. Could a failure end up costing you more than you've > saved? I'd rather get cheaper servers (maybe even used off ebay??) so I could > have at least two of them. > > If you do go with a one node solution, altho I haven't tried it myself Priam > looks like a good place to start for backups, otherwise roll your own with > incremental snapshotting turned on and a watch on the snapshot directory. > Storage on something like S3 or Cloud Files is very cheap so there's no good > excuse for no backups. > > On Thu, Mar 15, 2012 at 7:12 PM, R. Verlangen <ro...@us2.nl> wrote: > Hi Drew, > > One other disadvantage is the lack of "consistency level" and "replication". > Both ware part of the high availability / redundancy. So you would really > need to backup your single-node-"cluster" to some other external location. > > Good luck! > > > 2012/3/15 Drew Kutcharian <d...@venarc.com> > Hi, > > We are working on a project that initially is going to have very little data, > but we would like to use Cassandra to ease the future scalability. Due to > budget constraints, we were thinking to run a single node Cassandra for now > and then add more nodes as required. > > I was wondering if it is recommended to run a single node cassandra in > production? Are there any other issues besides lack of high availability? > > Thanks, > > Drew > > >
