I essentially am using a time-based data model. But, if I don¹t delete obsolete data, my database will quickly become many times larger than necessary. After a year, it would probably be 20x the size it would be if I cleaned out obsolete data.
Based on an analysis of my schema and access patterns, I¹m pretty confident that things will go well. I just wish that confidence were backed up by experience rather than conjecture. Robert From: Anthony Grasso <anthony.gra...@gmail.com> Reply-To: <user@cassandra.apache.org> Date: Friday, January 10, 2014 at 7:12 PM To: <user@cassandra.apache.org> Subject: Re: Gotchas when creating a lot of tombstones Hi Robert, It sounds like you have done a fair bit investigating and testing already. Have you considered using a time based data model to avoid doing deletions in the database? Regards, Anthony On Thu, Jan 9, 2014 at 1:26 PM, sankalp kohli <kohlisank...@gmail.com> wrote: > With Level compaction, you will have some data which could not be reclaimed > with gc grace=0 because it has not compacted yet. For this you might want to > look at tombstone_threshold > > > On Wed, Jan 8, 2014 at 10:31 AM, Tyler Hobbs <ty...@datastax.com> wrote: >> >> On Wed, Jan 1, 2014 at 7:53 AM, Robert Wille <rwi...@fold3.com> wrote: >>> >>> Also, for this application, it would be quite reasonable to set gc grace >>> seconds to 0 for these tables. Zombie data wouldn¹t really be a problem. The >>> background process that cleans up orphaned browse structures would simply >>> re-delete any deleted data that reappeared. >> >> If you can set gc grace to 0, that will basically eliminate your tombstone >> concerns entirely, so I would suggest that. >> >> >> -- >> Tyler Hobbs >> DataStax <http://datastax.com/> >
