Yes I really think you should consider this Eugene. Triggering on all replicas 
at the same time will increase your latencies noticeably. 


> On 21 Apr 2017, at 22:25, Jon Haddad <jonathan.had...@gmail.com> wrote:
> 
> We (The Last Pickle) forked reaper a while ago and added support for 3.0.
> 
> https://github.com/thelastpickle/cassandra-reaper
> 
> We set up a mailing list here for Reaper specific questions: 
> https://groups.google.com/forum/#!forum/tlp-apache-cassandra-reaper-users
> 
> Jon
> 
>> On Apr 21, 2017, at 1:11 PM, eugene miretsky <eugene.miret...@gmail.com> 
>> wrote:
>> 
>> The Spotify repo (https://github.com/spotify/cassandra-reaper) seems to not 
>> be maintained anymore. I'm not sure if they even support Cassandra 3.0 
>> (https://github.com/spotify/cassandra-reaper/issues/140). 
>> 
>> Regardless, in Cassandra 3.0 repairs are
>> 1) Incremental, which means that the same SSTables will not be repaired 
>> twice. 
>> 2) Parallel, which means that when you call repair, all nodes repair at the 
>> same time. 
>> 
>> I suppose that in the worst case, calling repair from X nodes could trigger 
>> X repair processes (that will each trigger a Markel tree building on each 
>> node). But I would assume that Cassandra prevents this by making sure that 
>> there is only one repair process running per node. 
>> 
>> 
>> 
>>> On Fri, Apr 21, 2017 at 2:43 AM, Oskar Kjellin <oskar.kjel...@gmail.com> 
>>> wrote:
>>> It will create more overhead on your cluster. Consider using something like 
>>> reaper to manage.
>>> 
>>> > On 21 Apr 2017, at 00:57, eugene miretsky <eugene.miret...@gmail.com> 
>>> > wrote:
>>> >
>>> > In Cassandra 3.0 the default nodetool repair behaviour is incremental and 
>>> > parallel.
>>> > Is there a downside to triggering repair from multiple nodes at the same 
>>> > time?
>>> >
>>> > Basically, instead of scheduling a cron job on one node to run repair, I 
>>> > want to schedule the job on every node (this way, I don't have to worry 
>>> > about repair if the one node goes down). Alternatively, I could build a 
>>> > smarter solution for HA repair jobs, but that seems like an overkill.
>> 
> 

Reply via email to