[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13418?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15988846#comment-15988846
 ] 

Jeff Jirsa commented on CASSANDRA-13418:
----------------------------------------

I think the path forward is this:

Let's create a new compaction option, that ISNT in any of the autocomplete 
logic, and has a scary name {{unsafe_aggressive_sstable_expiration}} . We could 
also add a system property {{-Dcassandra.unsafe.aggressive_sstable_expiration}} 
to make sure nobody ever enables this by mistake and gets unsafe behavior. The 
same patch should add a section to the documentation explaining exactly why 
this option is unsafe.

Finally, The approach in the patch on this ticket is different from the 
approach on the fork [~intjonathan] linked - the reviewer (I can do it, or 
perhaps [~krummas] ) should definitely evaluate which approach is going to be 
better. 

> Allow TWCS to ignore overlaps when dropping fully expired sstables
> ------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-13418
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13418
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>          Components: Compaction
>            Reporter: Corentin Chary
>              Labels: twcs
>
> http://thelastpickle.com/blog/2016/12/08/TWCS-part1.html explains it well. If 
> you really want read-repairs you're going to have sstables blocking the 
> expiration of other fully expired SSTables because they overlap.
> You can set unchecked_tombstone_compaction = true or tombstone_threshold to a 
> very low value and that will purge the blockers of old data that should 
> already have expired, thus removing the overlaps and allowing the other 
> SSTables to expire.
> The thing is that this is rather CPU intensive and not optimal. If you have 
> time series, you might not care if all your data doesn't exactly expire at 
> the right time, or if data re-appears for some time, as long as it gets 
> deleted as soon as it can. And in this situation I believe it would be really 
> beneficial to allow users to simply ignore overlapping SSTables when looking 
> for fully expired ones.
> To the question: why would you need read-repairs ?
> - Full repairs basically take longer than the TTL of the data on my dataset, 
> so this isn't really effective.
> - Even with a 10% chances of doing a repair, we found out that this would be 
> enough to greatly reduce entropy of the most used data (and if you have 
> timeseries, you're likely to have a dashboard doing the same important 
> queries over and over again).
> - LOCAL_QUORUM is too expensive (need >3 replicas), QUORUM is too slow.
> I'll try to come up with a patch demonstrating how this would work, try it on 
> our system and report the effects.
> cc: [~adejanovski], [~rgerard] as I know you worked on similar issues already.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: commits-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org
For additional commands, e-mail: commits-h...@cassandra.apache.org

Reply via email to