[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9754?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15139712#comment-15139712
]
Jack Krupansky commented on CASSANDRA-9754:
-------------------------------------------
bq. large CQL partitions (4GB,75GB,etc)
What is the intended target/sweet spot for large partitions... 1GB, 2GB, 4GB,
8GB, 10GB, 15GB, 16GB, or... what? Will random access to larger partitions
create any significant heap/off-heap memory demand, or will heap/memory simply
become the total rows accessed regardless of how they might be bucketed into
partitions?
Will we be able to tell people that bucketing of partitions is now never
needed, or will there now just be a larger bucket size, like 4GB/partition
rather than the 10MB or 50MB or 100MB that some of us recommend today?
> Make index info heap friendly for large CQL partitions
> ------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-9754
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9754
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: sankalp kohli
> Assignee: Michael Kjellman
> Priority: Minor
>
> Looking at a heap dump of 2.0 cluster, I found that majority of the objects
> are IndexInfo and its ByteBuffers. This is specially bad in endpoints with
> large CQL partitions. If a CQL partition is say 6,4GB, it will have 100K
> IndexInfo objects and 200K ByteBuffers. This will create a lot of churn for
> GC. Can this be improved by not creating so many objects?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
