Our badness threshold is 0.1 currently(just checked). Our website used to get slow during a slow node time until we rolled our own patch out.
Dean From: srmore <comom...@gmail.com<mailto:comom...@gmail.com>> Reply-To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>" <user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>> Date: Monday, June 3, 2013 2:31 PM To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>" <user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>> Subject: Re: Consistency level for multi-datacenter setup We observed that as well, please let us know what you find out it would be extremely helpful. There is also this property that you can play with to take care of slow nodes dynamic_snitch_badness_threshold. http://www.datastax.com/docs/1.1/configuration/node_configuration#dynamic-snitch-badness-threshold Thanks ! On Mon, Jun 3, 2013 at 3:24 PM, Hiller, Dean <dean.hil...@nrel.gov<mailto:dean.hil...@nrel.gov>> wrote: Also, we had to put a fix into cassandra so it removed "slow nodes" from the list of nodes to read from. With that fix our QUOROM(not local quorom) started working again and would easily take the other DC nodes out of the list of reading from for you as well. I need to circle back to with my teammate to check if he got his fix posted to the dev list or not. Later, Dean From: srmore <comom...@gmail.com<mailto:comom...@gmail.com><mailto:comom...@gmail.com<mailto:comom...@gmail.com>>> Reply-To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org><mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>" <user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org><mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>> Date: Monday, June 3, 2013 2:09 PM To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org><mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>" <user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org><mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>>> Subject: Consistency level for multi-datacenter setup I am a bit confused when using the consistency level for multi datacenter setup. Following is my setup: I have 4 nodes the way these are set up are Node 1 DC 1 - N1DC1 Node 2 DC 1 - N2DC1 Node 1 DC 2 - N1DC2 Node 2 DC 2 - N2DC2 I setup a delay in between two datacenters (DC1 and DC2 around 1 sec one way) I am observing that when I use consistency level 2 for some reason the coordinate node is picking up the nodes from other datacenter. My understanding was that Cassandra picks up nodes which are close by (from local datacenter), determined by Gossip but looks like that's not the case. I found the following comment on Datastax website : "If using a consistency level of ONE or LOCAL_QUORUM, only the nodes in the same data center as the coordinator node must respond to the client request in order for the request to succeed." Does this mean that for multi datacenter we can only use ONE or LOCAL_QUORUM if we want to use the local datacenter to avoid cross datacenter latency. I am using the GossipingPropertyFileSnitch. Thanks !
