cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Carl Yeksigian (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-8739) Don't check for overlap with sstables that have had their start positions moved in LCS
Date Thu, 19 Feb 2015 19:30:14 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8739?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14327989#comment-14327989
] 

Carl Yeksigian commented on CASSANDRA-8739:
-------------------------------------------

I'm not sure how the change to the way it calculates the L0 compacting makes a difference;
it seems like they should be the same.

The new L0 overlapping check makes sense.

> Don't check for overlap with sstables that have had their start positions moved in LCS
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-8739
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8739
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Marcus Eriksson
>            Assignee: Marcus Eriksson
>             Fix For: 2.1.4
>
>         Attachments: 0001-8739.patch
>
>
> When picking compaction candidates in LCS, we check that we won't cause any overlap in
the higher level. Problem is that we compare the files that have had their start positions
moved meaning we can cause overlap. We need to also include the tmplink files when checking
this.
> Note that in 2.1 overlap is not as big problem as earlier, if adding an sstable would
cause overlap, we send it back to L0 instead, meaning we do a bit more compaction but we never
actually have overlap.



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

Mime
View raw message