Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-commits-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 30568 invoked from network); 30 Nov 2010 14:48:37 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 30 Nov 2010 14:48:37 -0000 Received: (qmail 73323 invoked by uid 500); 30 Nov 2010 14:48:37 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-commits-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 73203 invoked by uid 500); 30 Nov 2010 14:48:37 -0000 Mailing-List: contact commits-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list commits@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 73184 invoked by uid 99); 30 Nov 2010 14:48:36 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:48:36 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2000.0 required=10.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.22] (HELO thor.apache.org) (140.211.11.22) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:48:34 +0000 Received: from thor (localhost [127.0.0.1]) by thor.apache.org (8.13.8+Sun/8.13.8) with ESMTP id oAUEmCf7014756 for ; Tue, 30 Nov 2010 14:48:12 GMT Message-ID: <12190456.24181291128492701.JavaMail.jira@thor> Date: Tue, 30 Nov 2010 09:48:12 -0500 (EST) From: "Jonathan Ellis (JIRA)" To: commits@cassandra.apache.org Subject: [jira] Commented: (CASSANDRA-1608) Redesigned Compaction MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1608?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12965239#action_12965239 ] Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-1608: ------------------------------------------- 1) is a possibility but the implementation details would be very different. snitch has nothing to do with compaction and gossip is too high-latency. 2) sounds like a great way to make things very very fragile > Redesigned Compaction > --------------------- > > Key: CASSANDRA-1608 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-1608 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Improvement > Components: Core > Reporter: Chris Goffinet > Fix For: 0.7.1 > > > After seeing the I/O issues in CASSANDRA-1470, I've been doing some more thinking on this subject that I wanted to lay out. > I propose we redo the concept of how compaction works in Cassandra. At the moment, compaction is kicked off based on a write access pattern, not read access pattern. In most cases, you want the opposite. You want to be able to track how well each SSTable is performing in the system. If we were to keep statistics in-memory of each SSTable, prioritize them based on most accessed, and bloom filter hit/miss ratios, we could intelligently group sstables that are being read most often and schedule them for compaction. We could also schedule lower priority maintenance on SSTable's not often accessed. > I also propose we limit the size of each SSTable to a fix sized, that gives us the ability to better utilize our bloom filters in a predictable manner. At the moment after a certain size, the bloom filters become less reliable. This would also allow us to group data most accessed. Currently the size of an SSTable can grow to a point where large portions of the data might not actually be accessed as often. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. - You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.