cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Jonathan Shook (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Commented] (CASSANDRA-10403) Consider reverting to CMS GC on 3.0
Date Wed, 30 Sep 2015 16:12:04 GMT

    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10403?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14937456#comment-14937456
] 

Jonathan Shook commented on CASSANDRA-10403:
--------------------------------------------

[~pauloricardomg] I understand, with your updated comment.
For systems that can't support a larger heap, CMS is fine, as long as you don't mind saturating
survivor and triggering the cascade of GC-induced side-effects. Still, this is a performance
trade-off with resiliency.

I want to be clear that I think it would be a loss for us to just disregard G1 for larger
memory systems as the general case. There seems to be some tension between the actual field
experience and prognostication as to how it should work. I would like for data to lead the
way on this, as it should.

> Consider reverting to CMS GC on 3.0
> -----------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-10403
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10403
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Config
>            Reporter: Joshua McKenzie
>            Assignee: Paulo Motta
>             Fix For: 3.0.0 rc2
>
>
> Reference discussion on CASSANDRA-7486.
> For smaller heap sizes G1 appears to have some throughput/latency issues when compared
to CMS. With our default max heap size at 8G on 3.0, there's a strong argument to be made
for having CMS as the default for the 3.0 release.



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

Mime
View raw message