I would think its because of the index and filter files. Also the additional data which gets added because of serialization. Also, since SStables are only deleted after the compaction us finished, it might be possible that when you checked, the intermediate SSTables were not yet deleted.
However, 50% additional disk usage does sound bad. On Wed, May 21, 2014 at 4:42 PM, Phil Luckhurst < phil.luckhu...@powerassure.com> wrote: > I'm wondering if the lack of response to this means it was a dumb question > however I've searched the documentation again but I still can't find an > answer :-( > > Phil > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Can-SSTables-overlap-with-SizeTieredCompactionStrategy-tp7594574p7594627.html > Sent from the cassandra-u...@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at > Nabble.com. >
