Mailing-List: contact commits-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Date: Thu, 6 Apr 2017 14:53:41 +0000 (UTC)
From: "Romain GERARD (JIRA)" <jira@apache.org>
To: commits@cassandra.apache.org
Message-ID: <JIRA.13061867.1491427038000.224845.1491490421745@Atlassian.JIRA>
In-Reply-To: <JIRA.13061867.1491427038000@Atlassian.JIRA>
References: <JIRA.13061867.1491427038000@Atlassian.JIRA> <JIRA.13061867.1491427038561@jira-lw-us.apache.org>
Subject: [jira] [Comment Edited] (CASSANDRA-13418) Allow TWCS to ignore
 overlaps
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=utf-8
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit
archived-at: Thu, 06 Apr 2017 14:53:47 -0000


    [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13418?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15959035#comment-15959035 ] 

Romain GERARD edited comment on CASSANDRA-13418 at 4/6/17 2:53 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------

I may be wrong but wasn't unchecked_tombstone_compaction combined with tombstone_compaction_interval designed to be used for this use case ? Even if dropping the sstable is more efficient than compacting it, if someone knowledgeable can tell me I would be pleased.

I am not against adding an other option, but I would rather have the confidence that I add it out of need rather than because I missed something already existant in cassandra.


was (Author: rgerard):
I may be wrong but wasn't unchecked_tombstone_compaction combined with tombstone_compaction_interval designed to be used for this use case ? Even if dropping the sstable is more efficient than compacting it. If someone knowledgeable can tell me I would be pleased.

I am not against adding an other option, but I would rather have the confidence that I add it out of need rather than because I missed something already existant in cassandra.

> Allow TWCS to ignore overlaps
> -----------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-13418
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13418
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Compaction
>            Reporter: Corentin Chary
>              Labels: twcs
>
> http://thelastpickle.com/blog/2016/12/08/TWCS-part1.html explains it well. If you really want read-repairs you're going to have sstables blocking the expiration of other fully expired SSTables because they overlap.
> You can set unchecked_tombstone_compaction = true or tombstone_threshold to a very low value and that will purge the blockers of old data that should already have expired, thus removing the overlaps and allowing the other SSTables to expire.
> The thing is that this is rather CPU intensive and not optimal. If you have time series, you might not care if all your data doesn't exactly expire at the right time, or if data re-appears for some time, as long as it gets deleted as soon as it can. And in this situation I believe it would be really beneficial to allow users to simply ignore overlapping SSTables when looking for fully expired ones.
> To the question: why would you need read-repairs ?
> - Full repairs basically take longer than the TTL of the data on my dataset, so this isn't really effective.
> - Even with a 10% chances of doing a repair, we found out that this would be enough to greatly reduce entropy of the most used data (and if you have timeseries, you're likely to have a dashboard doing the same important queries over and over again).
> - LOCAL_QUORUM is too expensive (need >3 replicas), QUORUM is too slow.
> I'll try to come up with a patch demonstrating how this would work, try it on our system and report the effects.
> cc: [~adejanovski], [~rgerard] as I know you worked on similar issues already.


--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)