Do you have any secondary indexes defined in the schema? That could lead to a 'mega row' pretty easily depending on the cardinality of the value.
On Mon, Dec 9, 2013 at 3:02 AM, Klaus Brunner <klaus.brun...@gmail.com>wrote: > We're running largely default settings, with the exception of shard > (1) and replica (0-n) counts and EC2-related snitch etc. No row > caching at all. The logs never showed the same kind of entries > pre-OOM, it basically occurred out of the blue. > > However, it seems that the problem has now subsided after forcing a > compaction (using LeveledCompaction) that took several hours. Not sure > if that's a permanent solution yet, but things are looking good so > far. > > Klaus > > > 2013/12/6 Vicky Kak <vicky....@gmail.com>: > > I am not sure if you had got a chance to take a look at this > > http://www.datastax.com/docs/1.1/troubleshooting/index#oom > > http://www.datastax.com/docs/1.1/install/recommended_settings > > > > Can you attach the cassandra logs and the cassandra.yaml, it should be > able > > to give us more details about the issue? > > > > Thanks, > > -VK > > > -- ----------------- Nate McCall Austin, TX @zznate Co-Founder & Sr. Technical Consultant Apache Cassandra Consulting http://www.thelastpickle.com
