The output of this command seems to make no sense unless I think of it as 5
completely separate histograms that just happen to be displayed together.

Using this example output should I read it as: my reads all took either 1
or 2 sstable.  And separately, I had write latencies of 3,7,19.  And
separately I had read latencies of 2, 8,69, etc?

In other words...each row isn't really a row...i.e. on those 16033 reads
from a single SSTable I didn't have 0 write latency, 0 read latency, 0 row
size and 0 column count.  Is that right?

Offset      SSTables     Write Latency      Read Latency          Row Size
     Column Count
1              16033             0                            0
               0                 0
2                303               0                            0
                 0                 1
3                  0                 0                            0
                   0                 0
4                  0                 0                            0
                   0                 0
5                  0                 0                            0
                   0                 0
6                  0                 0                            0
                   0                 0
7                  0                 0                            0
                   0                 0
8                  0                 0                            2
                   0                 0
10                 0                 0                            0
                   0              6261
12                 0                 0                            2
                   0               117
14                 0                 0                            8
                   0                 0
17                 0                 3                           69
                   0               255
20                 0                 7                          163
                   0                 0
24                 0                19                         1369
                   0                 0

Reply via email to