Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cassandra-commits-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-commits-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 930A690FC for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 07:09:02 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 98992 invoked by uid 500); 22 Nov 2011 07:09:02 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-commits-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 98965 invoked by uid 500); 22 Nov 2011 07:09:01 -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 98952 invoked by uid 99); 22 Nov 2011 07:09:01 -0000 Received: from athena.apache.org (HELO athena.apache.org) (140.211.11.136) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 07:09:01 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=-2001.2 required=5.0 tests=ALL_TRUSTED,RP_MATCHES_RCVD X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received: from [140.211.11.116] (HELO hel.zones.apache.org) (140.211.11.116) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 07:08:59 +0000 Received: from hel.zones.apache.org (hel.zones.apache.org [140.211.11.116]) by hel.zones.apache.org (Postfix) with ESMTP id DA8D496614 for ; Tue, 22 Nov 2011 07:08:39 +0000 (UTC) Date: Tue, 22 Nov 2011 07:08:39 +0000 (UTC) From: "Chris Goffinet (Issue Comment Edited) (JIRA)" To: commits@cassandra.apache.org Message-ID: <853551591.1580.1321945719897.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org> In-Reply-To: <1992403656.1496.1321942960395.JavaMail.tomcat@hel.zones.apache.org> Subject: [jira] [Issue Comment Edited] (CASSANDRA-3518) Back pressure users by request/s instead of concurrent reads/writes MIME-Version: 1.0 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8 Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit X-JIRA-FingerPrint: 30527f35849b9dde25b450d4833f0394 [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3518?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13154920#comment-13154920 ] Chris Goffinet edited comment on CASSANDRA-3518 at 11/22/11 7:08 AM: --------------------------------------------------------------------- Radim, I know what the Request Scheduler is.. please read my ticket more carefully. {noformat} # Scheduler Options vary based on the type of scheduler # NoScheduler - Has no options # RoundRobin # - throttle_limit -- The throttle_limit is the number of in-flight # requests per client. Requests beyond # that limit are queued up until # running requests can complete. # The value of 80 here is twice the number of # concurrent_reads + concurrent_writes. {noformat} number of in-flight requests per client. I want to a) do this per user b) break it down so it's request/s not how many concurrent reads/writes in flight. was (Author: lenn0x): Radim, I know what the Request Scheduler is.. please read my ticket more carefully. # Scheduler Options vary based on the type of scheduler # NoScheduler - Has no options # RoundRobin # - throttle_limit -- The throttle_limit is the number of in-flight # requests per client. Requests beyond # that limit are queued up until # running requests can complete. # The value of 80 here is twice the number of # concurrent_reads + concurrent_writes. number of in-flight requests per client. I want to a) do this per user b) break it down so it's request/s not how many concurrent reads/writes in flight. > Back pressure users by request/s instead of concurrent reads/writes > ------------------------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CASSANDRA-3518 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3518 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Bug > Affects Versions: 1.0.2 > Reporter: Chris Goffinet > > We are running into use cases where it makes a lot of sense to have QoS at the request level per user. Imagine this case: > I have a cluster that can do 100,000 req/s. But I want to limit the user to only being able to do either 50,000 read or write/s per second in the cluster. I rather give back pressure to the user then make the cluster fall down because the user tried to take down my cluster. > Also another case we have is where you have experimental features and want to give access to certain group of customers and let them run experiments on data. You *dont* want them taking down the cluster, you rather make them fail fast, or slow them down. If I could limit a user to N req/s for reads or writes, instead of adding back pressure based on # of concurrent requests in each stage, this would go a long way for us. > We have had a few incidents where spinning up new features caused unexpected load and we couldn't stop them without turning the feature off. -- This message is automatically generated by JIRA. If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators: https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira