cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Jack Krupansky <>
Subject Re: Best practice: Multiple clusters vs multiple tables in a single cluster?
Date Thu, 02 Apr 2015 16:10:49 GMT
Sounds very appropriate for your situation.

Also... you have the option of creating separate data centers, so that one
cluster can service multiple work loads, so you get the benefits of both
worlds, but that would mean you need separate nodes for the different key
spaces for your use case, so it would probably not be a big benefit to you
until you reach the stage of having many nodes. This would let you manage
the load between the various apps, without requiring separate clusters per
se. Typically multi-DC operation relates to sharing the same data, so if
you are really talking about disjoint key spaces, the benefit is not so

-- Jack Krupansky

On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 11:51 AM, Ian Rose <> wrote:

> Thanks for the input, folks!
> As a startup, we don't really have different dev teams / apps - everything
> is in service of "the product", so given these responses, I think putting
> both into the same cluster is the best idea.  And if we want to split them
> out in the future we are still small enough that it would be a pain but not
> the end of the world...
> Cheers,
> Ian
> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 9:57 AM, Carlos Rolo <> wrote:
>> Adding a new keyspace should be perfectly fine. Unless you have
>> completely distinct workloads for the different keyspaces. Even so you can
>> balanced some stuff at keyspace/table level. But I would go with a new
>> keyspace not with a new cluster given the small size you say you have.
>> Regards,
>> Carlos Juzarte Rolo
>> Cassandra Consultant
>> Pythian - Love your data
>> rolo@pythian | Twitter: cjrolo | Linkedin: *
>> <>*
>> Mobile: +31 6 159 61 814 | Tel: +1 613 565 8696 x1649
>> On Thu, Apr 2, 2015 at 3:06 PM, Ian Rose <> wrote:
>>> Hi all -
>>> We currently have a single cassandra cluster that is dedicated to a
>>> relatively narrow purpose, with just 2 tables.  Soon we will need cassandra
>>> for another, unrelated, system, and my debate is whether to just add the
>>> new tables to our existing cassandra cluster or whether to spin up an
>>> entirely new, separate cluster for this new system.
>>> Does anyone have pros/cons to share on this?  It appears from watching
>>> talks and such online that the big users (e.g. Netflix, Spotify) tend to
>>> favor multiple, single-purpose clusters, and thus that was my initial
>>> preference.  But we are (for now) no where close to them in traffic so I'm
>>> wondering if running an entirely separate cluster would be a premature
>>> optimization which wouldn't pay for the (nontrivial) overhead in
>>> configuration management and ops.  While we are still small it might be
>>> much smarter to reuse our existing clusters so that I can get it done
>>> faster...
>>> Thanks!
>>> - Ian
>> --

View raw message