Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm
Precedence: bulk
Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Received-SPF: unknown (athena.apache.org: error in processing during lookup of
 phil.luckhurst@powerassure.com)
Date: Tue, 5 Aug 2014 01:09:38 -0700 (PDT)
From: Phil Luckhurst <phil.luckhurst@powerassure.com>
To: cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org
Message-ID: <1407226178633-7596106.post@n2.nabble.com>
In-Reply-To: <CD66E7784F3542F6ACB79F060207258D@JackKrupansky14>
References: 
 <CAAZU44nPw1H5MiSRJj=6sp_nnoJejmdT6oEri7KUaDNe5FYF=w@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEDUwd02sXC4-Sj+Bx-MBpFSbMLgj4PeKgTBT+cA2wctaWmhKQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAAZU44=Ee1Nx+tFxYjRM18-mBaii09OY+iRWwnfgZ1Qi2ttWdQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CAEDUwd3bJA20uVNcVyEJJPM90cFZB5uHTGCdjhm=1fYCcrh9kQ@mail.gmail.com>
 <CD66E7784F3542F6ACB79F060207258D@JackKrupansky14>
Subject: Re: Reasonable range for the max number of tables?
MIME-Version: 1.0
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Is there any mention of this limitation anywhere in the Cassandra
documentation? I don't see it mentioned in the 'Anti-patterns in Cassandra'
section of the DataStax 2.0 documentation or anywhere else.

When starting out with Cassandra as a store for a multi-tenant application
it seems very attractive to segregate data for each tenant using a tenant
specific keyspace each with their own set of tables. It's not until you
start browsing through forums such as this that you find out that it isn't
going to scale above a few tenants.

If you want to be able to segregate customer data in Cassandra is it the
accepted practice to have multiple Cassandra installations?


--
View this message in context: http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Reasonable-range-for-the-max-number-of-tables-tp7596094p7596106.html
Sent from the cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at Nabble.com.