cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "mck (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-8032) User based request scheduler
Date Sun, 05 Oct 2014 09:33:34 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8032?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14159487#comment-14159487
] 

mck commented on CASSANDRA-8032:
--------------------------------

[~iamaleksey] I was unaware originally that request_scheduler was only implemented against
the thrift api, and never for cql.
So  guess the question, ie CASSANDRA-8059, is whether to implement request_scheduler for cql,
or to remove it along with thrift?

> User based request scheduler
> ----------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-8032
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8032
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Core
>            Reporter: mck
>            Assignee: mck
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: patch
>         Attachments: v1-0001-CASSANDRA-8032-User-based-request-scheduler.txt
>
>
> Today only a keyspace based request scheduler exists.
> Post CASSANDRA-4898 it could be possible to implement a request_scheduler based on users
(from system_auth.credentials) rather than keyspaces. This could offer a finer granularity
of control, from read-only vs read-write users on keyspaces, to application dedicated vs ad-hoc
users. Alternatively it could also offer a granularity larger and easier to work with than
per keyspace.
> The request scheduler is a useful concept but i think that setups with enough nodes often
favour separate clusters rather than either creating separate virtual datacenters or using
the request scheduler. To give the request scheduler another, and more flexible, implementation
could especially help those users that don't yet have enough nodes to warrant separate clusters,
or even separate virtual datacenters. On such smaller clusters cassandra can still be seen
as an unstable technology because poor consumers/schemas can easily affect, even bring down,
a whole cluster.
> I haven't look into the feasibility of this within the code, but it comes to mind as
rather simple, and i would be interested in offering a patch if the idea carries validity.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Mime
View raw message