Hey Radim, I knew that it would take a while to stabilize, which is why I waited 1/2 a year before giving it a go. I guess I was just surprised that 6 months wasn't long enough…
I'll have to look at the differences between 1.2 and 2.0. Is there a good resource for checking that? Your experience is less than encouraging…:) I am worried that if I stick with it, I'll have to invest time into learning the code base as well, and as a small startup time is our most valuable resource… Thanks for the thoughts! Paul On Jul 24, 2013, at 6:42 AM, Radim Kolar <h...@filez.com> wrote: > >> From my limited experience I think Cassandra is a dangerous choice for an >> young limited funding/experience start-up expecting to scale fast. >> > Its not dangerous, just do not try to be smart and follow what other big > cassandra users like twitter, netflix, facebook, etc are using. If they are > still at 1.1, then do not rush to 1.2. You can get all informations you need > from github and their maven repos. Same method can be used for any other not > mainstream software like scala and hadoop. > > Also every cassandra new branch comes with extensive number of difficult to > spot bugs and it takes about 1/2 year to stabilize. Usually new features > should be avoided. Best is to stay 1 major version behind. This is true for > almost any mission critical software. > > You can help with testing cassandra 2.0 beta. Create your testsuite and run > it against your target cassandra version. Test suite also needs to track > performance. From my testing performance of 2.0 is about same as 1.2 in my > workload. > > I had lot of problems after i migrated from really good working 0.8.x to > 1.0.5. Even if preproduction testing did not discovered any problems, there > were memory leaks in 1.0.5, hint delivery was broken and there were problem > with repair making old tombstones appear causing snowball effect. Last one > was fixed about 1year later in mainstream C* after i fixed it myself because > no dev believed me that such thing can happen.
