[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6109?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13800057#comment-13800057
]
Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-6109:
-------------------------------------------
What if we just added a bucket filter that said, SSTables representing less
than X% of the reads will not be bucketed? Straightforward to tune and I can't
think of any really pathological cases, other than where size-tiering just
doesn't put hot overlapping sstables in the same bucket. (Which I think is out
of scope to solve here -- we need cardinality estimation to fix that.)
> Consider coldness in STCS compaction
> ------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-6109
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6109
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Core
> Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
> Assignee: Tyler Hobbs
> Fix For: 2.0.2
>
> Attachments: 6109-v1.patch, 6109-v2.patch
>
>
> I see two options:
> # Don't compact cold sstables at all
> # Compact cold sstables only if there is nothing more important to compact
> The latter is better if you have cold data that may become hot again... but
> it's confusing if you have a workload such that you can't keep up with *all*
> compaction, but you can keep up with hot sstable. (Compaction backlog stat
> becomes useless since we fall increasingly behind.)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.1#6144)
