cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Russell Alexander Spitzer (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-6851) Improve anticompaction after incremental repair
Date Tue, 20 May 2014 20:00:39 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6851?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14003896#comment-14003896
] 

Russell Alexander Spitzer commented on CASSANDRA-6851:
------------------------------------------------------

Ah I see, that makes a lot more sense. We could always try to do a comparison of bloom filters
for sstables, and try to anti-compact pairs with the most similar filters?

IE:
if dotproduct(bloomfilters) > some threshold : place in the same anticompaction group.

> Improve anticompaction after incremental repair
> -----------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-6851
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6851
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Core
>            Reporter: Marcus Eriksson
>            Assignee: Russell Alexander Spitzer
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: compaction, lhf
>             Fix For: 2.1.1
>
>
> After an incremental repair we iterate over all sstables and split them in two parts,
one containing the repaired data and one the unrepaired. We could in theory double the number
of sstables on a node.
> To avoid this we could make anticompaction also do a compaction, for example, if we are
to anticompact 10 sstables, we could anticompact those to 2.
> Note that we need to avoid creating too big sstables though, if we anticompact all sstables
on a node it would essentially be a major compaction.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)

Mime
View raw message