cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jonathan Ellis (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] Assigned: (CASSANDRA-51) Memory footprint for memtable
Date Fri, 10 Apr 2009 15:03:15 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-51?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Jonathan Ellis reassigned CASSANDRA-51:
---------------------------------------

    Assignee: Eric Evans

>  Memory footprint for memtable
> ------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-51
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-51
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>         Environment: all
>            Reporter: Sandeep Tata
>            Assignee: Eric Evans
>             Fix For: 0.3
>
>
> The implementation of EfficientBidiMap(EBM) today stores the column in two place, a map
and a sorted set. Both data structures store exactly the same values.
> I assume we're storing this twice so that the map can give us O(1) reads while the sortedset
is important for efficient flush. Is this tradeoff important ? Do we want to store the data
twice to get O(1) reads over O(log(n)) reads from sortedset? Is the sortedset implementation
broken? Perhaps we should consider a configuration option that turns off the map -- write
performance will be slightly improved, read performance will be somewhat worse, and the memory
footprint will probably be about half. Certainly sounds like a good alternative tradeoff.

-- 
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.


Mime
View raw message