MySQL has same read latency issue; short benchmarks; slow writes are better than uncompacted data (was RE: Persistently increasing read latency)

I gave MySQL 5.1.38 a try (that's not the clustered version, so nevermind what happens if a disk is lost) and I saw the same persistently increasing latency that I saw with Cassandra. I also tried storing into files on the local filesystem (not clustered or transactional, so nevermind what

RE: Persistently increasing read latency

and preferably trunk if you are stress testing -Jonathan On Tue, Dec 1, 2009 at 12:11 PM, Freeman, Tim tim.free...@hp.com wrote: In an 8 hour test run, I've seen the read latency for Cassandra drift fairly linearly from ~460ms to ~900ms.  Eventually my application gets starved for reads

RE: Persistently increasing read latency

again? On Thu, Dec 3, 2009 at 12:58 PM, Freeman, Tim tim.free...@hp.com wrote: I ran another test last night with the build dated 29 Nov 2009.  Other than the Cassandra version, the setup was the same as before.  I got qualitatively similar results as before, too -- the read latency increased

Suppose I used RackAware and then lost a rack. Then what?

I suppose the point behind RackAware is that you can lose one rack or datacenter and then recover somehow. How would the recovery work? I'd probably have part of my cluster left, the replication factor would be three, and I'd have less than a quorum for some of the rows. I'd have to add a

RE: java.util.concurrent.TimeoutException: Operation timed out - received only 0 responses from .

I use RpcTimeoutInMillis3/RpcTimeoutInMillis in storage-conf.xml, and for the most part that makes the timeouts go away. My application would rather wait 30 seconds if needed, since it would otherwise retry. YMMV. I hear that Cassandra 0.5 will be better at avoiding the timeouts.

RE: Cassandra backup and restore procedures

I'm not going to be on Amazon, but I'm planning to use hostnames instead of IP's and a dynamically generated /etc/hosts file and I think that would deal with this problem. I'm sure a private DNS server would be just as good. My real motive in saying this is so someone will scream at me if I'm

Java Cassandra client connecting to a pool of servers?

I'd like to be able to say that a cluster of Cassandra servers keeps working even if one of the nodes goes down. This would require the clients to connect to a different node if the one that it's using goes down. Is there code on the client side to do this already? There's a Cassandra.Client

RE: Timeout Exception

I'm running 0.4.1. I used to get timeouts, then I changed my timeout from 5 seconds to 30 seconds and I get no more timeouts. The relevant line from storage-conf.xml is: RpcTimeoutInMillis3/RpcTimeoutInMillis The maximum latency is often just over 5 seconds in the worst case when I

RE: Is the remove api working ??

. But If I've multiple servers and have inserted the data with ONE then what it's means I need to use only QUORUM instead ? Thanks On Mon, Nov 16, 2009 at 7:27 PM, Freeman, Tim tim.free...@hp.commailto:tim.free...@hp.com wrote: You might want to try ConsistencyLevel.QUORUM instead

RE: Leaked FDs

The symptoms are consistent with https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-533. I agree with Jonathan that the fix for that is in Trunk and not in 0.4.2. There's a code fix given in the bug, if you want to hack source and recompile. Tim Freeman Email: tim.free...@hp.com Desk in Palo