Hi, I agree with Alain, we have the same kind of problem here (4 DCs, ~1TB / node) and we are replacing our big servers full of spinning drives with a bigger number of smaller servers with SSDs (microservers are quite efficient in terms of rack space and cost).
Kévin On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 1:11 PM, Alain RODRIGUEZ <arodr...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > Our migration to SSD (from m1.xl to I2.2xl on AWS) has been a big win. I > mean we wen from 80 / 90 % disk utilisation to 20 % max. Basically, > bottleneck are not disks performances anymore in our case. We get rid of > one of our major issue that was disk contention. > > I highly recommend you to go ahead with this, even more with such a big > data set. Yet it will probably be more expensive per node. > > An other solution for you might be adding nodes (to have less to handle > per node and make maintenance operations like repair, bootstrap, > decommission, ... faster) > > C*heers, > > Alain > > > > > 2015-09-01 10:17 GMT+02:00 Sachin Nikam <skni...@gmail.com>: > >> We currently have a Cassandra Cluster spread over 2 DC. The data size on >> each node of the cluster is 1.2TB with spinning disk. Minor and Major >> compactions are slowing down our Read queries. It has been suggested that >> replacing Spinning disks with SSD might help. Has anybody done something >> similar? If so what has been the results? >> Also if we go with SSD, how big can each node get for commercially >> available SSDs? >> Regards >> Sachin >> > >
