Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 94066 invoked from network); 17 Jun 2010 19:58:33 -0000 Received: from unknown (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by 140.211.11.9 with SMTP; 17 Jun 2010 19:58:33 -0000 Received: (qmail 52597 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jun 2010 19:58:32 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-dev-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 52553 invoked by uid 500); 17 Jun 2010 19:58:32 -0000 Mailing-List: contact dev-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: dev@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list dev@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 52543 invoked by uid 99); 17 Jun 2010 19:58:32 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:58:32 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=2.2 required=10.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_NONE,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of jshook@gmail.com designates 209.85.212.44 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.212.44] (HELO mail-vw0-f44.google.com) (209.85.212.44) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 19:58:25 +0000 Received: by vws15 with SMTP id 15so238929vws.31 for ; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:58:04 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:received:received:received :in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=9i/cO62rJVoa06BELMzF9EICk178aTPtMYHBLRJnWM0=; b=bjo4dyIF8njHI97XGlGppX9NtZ6x/naEdUmAqxsLvdD/Dfz3zjJ8u1fhh9j3sARck0 irZ7EaUnMth2O8wjS6nopRVJprOOisM2C/hRLQsYfBrWc/SD8j2aOZR+n6FK5b4Ml+Xp uViHkji0rlKqfypIm0ot4j/1GM3tsVcQBOf/g= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=Qr0XC7pRw7FgJpMw/t+BVME82aURA9NFZKtz39g2HoEvqsHJHes7uGsTRgJQ9Nof+M guxnh0fXyr/NuvaKsZiMoZFWvkTlj7d3Rmg993KmVx5QNfP1Jja3Pg+762pRKHh5RXfY DzGkC+bQflXFc9g3/7CUgeteaqbsfxea7SfZ8= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.224.64.72 with SMTP id d8mr13467qai.109.1276804684318; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:58:04 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.87.133 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:58:03 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.229.87.133 with HTTP; Thu, 17 Jun 2010 12:58:03 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: <60143.94.64.225.5.1276796672.squirrel@webmail.ceid.upatras.gr> References: <60143.94.64.225.5.1276796672.squirrel@webmail.ceid.upatras.gr> Date: Thu, 17 Jun 2010 14:58:03 -0500 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Cassandra Multiple DataCenter Suitability - why? From: Jonathan Shook To: dev@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=0016e64ba1c0a8098304893f4101 X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --0016e64ba1c0a8098304893f4101 Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 This is a (yet another) question for the users list. On Jun 17, 2010 12:50 PM, wrote: Hello, I keep reading everywhere that Cassandra has supported multiple datacenters from the beginning. I would like to know what does Cassandra do to achieve that. Is it just that the developers have written some code that supports that scenario, or is there something inherent in Cassandra's design that is suitable for a multi DC environment, like minimizing inter-DC traffic? I have read about RackAwareStrategy on the wiki, and have also browsed through some code (DataCenterShardStrategy), but I would like to see what people have to say about this. I also read about an implemenetation of Rack Awareness employing Zookeeper, but I gather that wasn't released by Facebook and it was more geared towards single-DC rack awareness because Zookeeper is a bit heavy on the bandwidth. Anyway, just to sum it up, my question is this: please explain in brief the reasons why Cassandra is well suited for multi-DC environments. Alexander Altanis --0016e64ba1c0a8098304893f4101--