cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Alain RODRIGUEZ <>
Subject Re: dynamic_snitch=false, prioritisation/order or reads from replicas
Date Mon, 06 Aug 2018 17:26:43 GMT

> There are reports (in this ML too) that disabling dynamic snitching
> decreases response time.

I confirm that I have seen this improvement on clusters under pressure.

What effects stand behind this improvement?

My understanding is that this is due to the fact that the clients are then
'pinned', more sticking to specific nodes when the dynamic snitching is
off. I guess there is a better use of caches and in-memory structures,
reducing the amount of disk read needed, which can lead to way more
performances than switching from node to node as soon as the score of some
node is not good enough.
I am also not sure that the score calculation is always relevant, thus
increasing the threshold before switching reads to another node is still
often worst than disabling it completely. I am not sure if the score
calculation was fixed, but in most cases, I think it's safer to run with
'dynamic_snitch: false'. Anyway, it's possible to test it on a canary node
(or entire rack) and look at the p99 for read latencies for example :).

This ticket is old, but was precisely on that topic:

Alain Rodriguez - @arodream -
France / Spain

The Last Pickle - Apache Cassandra Consulting

2018-08-04 15:37 GMT+02:00 Kyrylo Lebediev <

> Hello!
> In case when dynamic snitching is enabled data is read from 'the fastest
> replica' and other replicas send digests for CL=QUORUM/LOCAL_QUORUM .
> When dynamic snitching is disabled, as the concept of the fastest replica
> disappears, which rules are used to choose from which replica to read
> actual data (not digests):
>  1) when all replicas are online
>  2) when the node primarily responsible for the token range is offline.
> There are reports (in this ML too) that disabling dynamic snitching
> decreases response time.
> What effects stand behind this improvement?
> Regards,
> Kyrill

View raw message