>range reassignments which becomes effective after a successful decommission.
But during leaving nodes announce themselves as "leaving". Do other leaving
nodes taking this into account and not stream data to them? (applicable also
for joining). I hope so ))
I guess problem with sequential adding/removing nodes is data overstreaming and
non-even load distribution. I mean if we have three racks it's better to
add/remove by three nodes (one in each rack) and to avoid state with four
nodes, for example.
Any thoughts?
On Tuesday, April 11, 2017 7:55 PM, benjamin roth <brs...@gmail.com> wrote:
I did not test it but I'd bet that parallel decommision will lead to
inconsistencies.Each decommission results in range movements and range
reassignments which becomes effective after a successful decommission.If you
start several decommissions at once, I guess the calculated reassignments are
invalid for at least one node after the first node finished the decommission
process.
I hope someone will correct me if i am wrong.
2017-04-11 18:43 GMT+02:00 Jacob Shadix <jacobsha...@gmail.com>:
Are you using vnodes? I typically do one-by-one as the decommission will create
additional load/network activity streaming data to the other nodes as the token
ranges are reassigned.
-- Jacob Shadix
On Sat, Apr 8, 2017 at 10:55 AM, Vlad <qa23d-...@yahoo.com> wrote:
Hi,
how multiple nodes should be decommissioned by "nodetool decommission"- one by
one or in parallel ?
Thanks.
