I do run DataStax as well as atop and don't think the disks were getting behind (but I could be wrong). If they were getting behind however how can I tell if that was due to compactions or other processing? As I read more it seems that a compaction taking 1-2 hours must mean I'm getting behind on compactions, right?
Brian On Mon, Jan 7, 2013 at 3:51 PM, aaron morton <aa...@thelastpickle.com>wrote: > Take a look at iostat -x 5 to see if your disks are dogging it. > > Cheers > > ----------------- > Aaron Morton > Freelance Cassandra Developer > New Zealand > > @aaronmorton > http://www.thelastpickle.com > > On 8/01/2013, at 9:13 AM, Michael Kjellman <mkjell...@barracuda.com> > wrote: > > Size tiered or leveled compaction? > > From: Brian Tarbox <tar...@cabotresearch.com> > Reply-To: "user@cassandra.apache.org" <user@cassandra.apache.org> > Date: Monday, January 7, 2013 12:03 PM > To: "user@cassandra.apache.org" <user@cassandra.apache.org> > Subject: help turning compaction..hours of run to get 0% compaction.... > > I have a column family where I'm doing 500 inserts/sec for 12 hours or so > at time. At some point my performance falls off a cliff due to time spent > doing compactions. > > I'm seeing row after row of logs saying that after 1 or 2 hours of > compactiing it reduced to 100% of 99% of the original. > > I'm trying to understand what direction this data points me to in term of > configuration change. > > a) increase my compaction_throughput_mb_per_sec because I'm falling > behind (am I falling behind?) > > b) enable multi-threaded compaction? > > Any help is appreciated. > > Brian > > ---------------------------------- > Join Barracuda Networks in the fight against hunger. > To learn how you can help in your community, please visit: > http://on.fb.me/UAdL4f > > > >
