Hi Jiayong,
That doesn't really match the situation described in the SO question. I
suspected it was related to repairing a table with MV and large
partitions, but based on the information you've given, I was clearly wrong.
A few hundreds MB partitions is not exactly unusual, I don't see that
alone could lead to frequent SSTable flushing. A repair session takes
weeks to complete is a bit worrying in terms of performance and
maintainability, but again it should not cause this issue.
Since we don't know the cause of it, I can see two possible solutions -
either replace the "broken" node, or dig into the logs (remember to turn
on the debug logs) and trying to identify the root cause. I personally
would recommend replacing the problematic node as a quick win.
Cheers,
Bowen
On 13/08/2021 20:31, Jiayong Sun wrote:
Hi Bowen,
We do have reaper repair job scheduled periodically and it can take
days even weeks to complete one round of repair due to large number of
rings/nodes. However, we have paused the repair since we are facing
this issue.
We do not use the MV in this cluster.
There is major table taking 95% of disk storage and workload but its
Partition Size is around 30 MB. There are a couple small tables with
the Max Partition Size over several hundreds of MB but their total
data size just about a few GB.
Any thoughts?
Thanks,
Jiayong
On Friday, August 13, 2021, 03:32:45 AM PDT, Bowen Song <bo...@bso.ng>
wrote:
Hi Jiayong,
Sorry I didn't make it clear in my previous email. When I commented on
the RAID0 setup, it was only a comment on the RAID0 setup vs JBOD, and
that was not in relation to the SSTable flushing issue. The part of my
previous email after the "On the frequent SSTable flush issue" line is
the part related to the SSTable flushing issue, and those two
questions at the end of it remain valid:
* Did you run repair?
* Do you use materialized views?
and, if I may, I'd also like to add another question:
* Do you have large (> 100 MB) partitions?
Those are the 3 things mentioned in the SO question. I'm trying to
find the connections between the issue you are experiencing and the
issue described in the SO question.
Cheers,
Bowen
On 13/08/2021 01:36, Jiayong Sun wrote:
Hello Bowen,
Thanks for your response.
Yes, we are aware of the theory that RAID0 vs individual JBOD, but all
of our clusters are using this RAID0 configuration through Azure,
while only on this cluster we see this issue so it's hardly to
conclude root cause to the disk. This is more like workload related,
and we are seeking feedback here for any other parameters in the yaml
that we could tune for this.
Thanks again,
Jiayong Sun
On Thursday, August 12, 2021, 04:55:51 AM PDT, Bowen Song
<bo...@bso.ng> <mailto:bo...@bso.ng> wrote:
Hello Jiayong,
Using multiple disks in a RAID0 for Cassandra data directory is not
recommended. You will get better fault tolerance and often better
performance too with multiple data directories, one on each disk.
If you stick with RAID0, it's not 4 disks, it's 1 from Cassandra's
point of view, because any read or write operation will have to touch
all 4 member disks. Therefore, 4 flush writers doesn't make much sense.
On the frequent SSTable flush issue, a quick internet search leads me to:
* an old bug in Cassandra 2.1 - CASSANDRA-8409
<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8409> which
shouldn't affect 3.x at all
* a StackOverflow question
<https://stackoverflow.com/questions/61030392/cassandra-node-jvm-hang-during-node-repair-a-table-with-materialized-view>
may be related
Did you run repair? Do you use materialized views?
Regards,
Bowen
On 11/08/2021 15:58, Jiayong Sun wrote:
Hi Erick,
The nodes have 4 SSD (1TB for each but we only use 2.4TB of space.
Current disk usage is about 50%) with RAID0.
Based on number of disks we increased memtable_flush_writers: 4
instead of default of 2.
For the following we set:
- max heap size - 31GB
- memtable_heap_space_in_mb (use default)
- memtable_offheap_space_in_mb (use default)
In the logs, we also noticed system.sstable_activity table has
hundreds of MB or GB of data and constantly flushing:
DEBUG [NativePoolCleaner] <timestamp> ColumnFamilyStore.java:932 -
Enqueuing flush of sstable_activity: 0.293KiB (0%) on-heap, 0.107KiB
(0%) off-heap
DEBUG [NonPeriodicTasks:1] <timestamp> SSTable.java:105 - Deleting
sstable:
/app/cassandra/data/system/sstable_activity-5a1ff267ace03f128563cfae6103c65e/md-103645-big
DEBUG [NativePoolCleaner] <timestamp> ColumnFamilyStore.java:1322 -
Flushing largest CFS(Keyspace='system',
ColumnFamily='sstable_activity') to free up room. Used total:
0.06/1.00, live: 0.00/0.00, flushing: 0.02/0.29, this: 0.00/0.00
Thanks,
Jiayong Sun
On Wednesday, August 11, 2021, 12:06:27 AM PDT, Erick Ramirez
<erick.rami...@datastax.com> <mailto:erick.rami...@datastax.com> wrote:
4 flush writers isn't bad since the default is 2. It doesn't make a
difference if you have fast disks (like NVMe SSDs) because only 1
thread gets used.
But if flushes are slow, the work gets distributed to 4 flush writers
so you end up with smaller flush sizes although it's difficult to tell
how tiny the SSTables would be without analysing the logs and overall
performance of your cluster.
Was there a specific reason you decided to bump it up to 4? I'm just
trying to get a sense of why you did it since it might provide some
clues. Out of curiosity, what do you have set for the following?
- max heap size
- memtable_heap_space_in_mb
- memtable_offheap_space_in_mb
