incubator-cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Plotnik, Alexey" <>
Subject RE: one big cluster vs multiple smaller clusters
Date Mon, 14 Oct 2013 06:55:06 GMT
If you are talking about scaling: Cassandra scaling is absolutely horizontal without namenodes
or other Mongo-bulshit-like intermediate daemons. And that’s why one big cluster has the
same throughput as many smaller clusters.
What will you do when your small clusters will exceed it’s capacity? Cassandra is designed
for very large data so feel free to utilize it’s capabilities.

If you are talking in terms of business logic: it make sense to divide, i.e. metadata and
really BIG data into different clusters, of course.

From: Wz1975 [mailto:wz1975@YAHOO.COM]
Sent: 14 октября 2013 г. 7:20
Subject: Re: one big cluster vs multiple smaller clusters
Importance: Low

we have choices of making one big cluster vs a few small clusters. I am trying to get pros
and cons for both options in genera.


Sent from my Samsung smartphone on AT&T

-------- Original message --------
Subject: Re: one big cluster vs multiple smaller clusters
From: Jon Haddad <<>>

This is a pretty vague question.  What are you trying to achieve?

On Oct 12, 2013, at 9:05 PM, Wei Zhu <<>>

As we bring more use cases to Cassandra, we have been thinking about the best way to host
it. Let's say we will have 15 physical machines available, we can use all of them to form
a big cluster or divide them into 3 clusters with 5 nodes each. As we will deploy to 1.2,
it becomes easier to expand the cluster with vnodes. I really don't see any good reasons to
make 3 smaller clusters. Did I miss anything obvious?


View raw message