incubator-cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Matthew Dennis <mden...@datastax.com>
Subject Re: NFS instead of local storage
Date Tue, 15 Feb 2011 01:25:42 GMT
no, it's actually worse to do that.

1) you're introducing single points of failure (your array).

2) you're introducing complexity and expense

3) you're introducing latency

4) you're introducing bottle necks

5) some other reasons...

You do want your commit log on a separate disk though.  The only reason I
wouldn't do that is if you just don't have that high of a write load, in
which case I would RAID whatever *local* disks you have on the box for
storage together and use that array for both commit log and data.

On Sun, Feb 13, 2011 at 5:25 PM, mcasandra <mohitanchlia@gmail.com> wrote:

>
> I just now watched some videos about performance tunning. And it looks like
> most of the bottleneck could be on reads. Also, it looks like it's
> advisable
> to put commit logs on separate drive.
>
> I was wondering if it makes sense to use NFS (if we can) with netapp array
> which provides it's own read and write caching.
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/NFS-instead-of-local-storage-tp6021959p6021959.html
> Sent from the cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at
> Nabble.com.
>

Mime
View raw message