cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Stephen Connolly <stephen.alan.conno...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Multi-tenancy, and authentication and authorization
Date Tue, 18 Jan 2011 21:27:05 GMT
I would imagine it to be somewhat easy to implement this via a thrift
wrapper so that each tenant is connecting to the proxy thrift server that
masks the fact that there are multiple tenants... or is that how people are
thinking about this

- Stephen

---
Sent from my Android phone, so random spelling mistakes, random nonsense
words and other nonsense are a direct result of using swype to type on the
screen
On 18 Jan 2011 21:20, "Aaron Morton" <aaron@thelastpickle.com> wrote:
> As everyone says, it's not issues with the Keyspace directly as they are
just a container. It's the CF's in the keyspace, but let's just say keyspace
cause it's easier.
>
> As things stand, if you allow point and click creation for keyspaces you
will hand over control of the memory requirements to the users. This will be
a bad thing. E.g. Lots of cf's will get created and you will run out of
memory, or cf's will get created with huge Memtable settings and you will
run out of memory, or caches will get set huge and you get the picture. One
badly behaving keyspace or column family can take down a node / cluster.
>
> IMHO currently the best way to share a Cassandra cluster is through some
sort of application layer that uses as static keyspace. Others have a better
understanding of the internals and may have ideas about how this could
change in the future.
>
> Aaron
>
> On 19/01/2011, at 9:07 AM, Ed Anuff <ed@anuff.com> wrote:
>
>> Hi Jeremy, thanks, I was really coming at it from the question of whether
keyspaces were a functional basis for multitenancy in Cassandra. I think the
MT issues discussed on the wiki page are the , but I'd like to get a better
understanding of the core issue of keyspaces and then try to get that onto
the page as maybe the first section.
>>
>> Ed
>>
>> On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 11:42 AM, Jeremy Hanna <
jeremy.hanna1234@gmail.com> wrote:
>> Feel free to use that wiki page or another wiki page to collaborate on
more pressing multi tenant issues. The wiki is editable by all. The
MultiTenant page was meant as a launching point for tracking progress on
things we could think of wrt MT.
>>
>> Obviously the memtable problem is the largest concern at this point. If
you have any ideas wrt that and want to collaborate on how to address that,
perhaps even in a way that would get accepted in core cassandra, feel free
to propose solutions in a jira ticket or on the list.
>>
>> A caveat to getting things into core cassandra - make sure anything you
do is considerate of single-tenant cassandra. If possible, make things
pluggable and optional. The round robin request scheduler is an example. The
functionality is there but you have to enable it. If it can't be made
pluggable/optional, you can get good feedback from the community about
proposed solutions in core Cassandra (like for the memtable issue in
particular).
>>
>> Anyway, just wanted to chime in with 2 cents about that page (since I
created it and was helping maintain it before getting pulled off onto other
projects).
>>
>> On Jan 18, 2011, at 1:12 PM, Ed Anuff wrote:
>>
>> > Hi Indika, I've done a lot of work using the keyspace per tenant model,
and I'm seeing big problems with the memory consumption, even though it's
certainly the most clean way to implement it. Luckily, before I used the
keyspace per tenant approach, I'd implemented my system using a single
keyspace approach and can still revert back to that. The rest of the stuff
for multi-tenancy on the wiki is largely irrelevant, but the keyspace issue
is a big concern at the moment.
>> >
>> > Ed
>> >
>> > On Tue, Jan 18, 2011 at 9:40 AM, indika kumara <indika.kuma@gmail.com>
wrote:
>> > Hi Aaron,
>> >
>> > I read some articles about the Cassandra, and now understand a little
bit about trade-offs.
>> >
>> > I feel the goal should be to optimize memory as well as performance. I
have to consider the number of column families, the columns per a family,
the number of rows, the memtable’s threshold, and so on. I also have to
consider how to maximize resource sharing among tenants. However, I feel
that a keyspace should be able to be configured based on the tenant’s class
(e.g replication factor). As per some resources, I feel that the issue is
not in the number of keyspaces, but with the number of CF, the number of the
rows in a CF, the numbers of columns, the size of the data in a column, and
so on. Am I correct? I appreciate your opinion.
>> >
>> > What would be the suitable approach? A keyspace per tenant (there would
be a limit on the tenants per a Cassandra cluster) or a keyspace for all
tenant.
>> >
>> > I still would love to expose the Cassandra ‘as-is’ to a tenant
virtually yet with acceptable memory consumption and performance.
>> >
>> > Thanks,
>> >
>> > Indika
>> >
>> >
>>
>>

Mime
View raw message