On 11/1/2010 6:01 AM, Eric Evans wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 10:55 -0500, Eric Evans wrote:
>> The RC1 vote[1] was vetoed due to, (among other things), the desire to
>> see more testing after the somewhat disruptive changes made in
>> CASSANDRA-1367[2]. Thus, I propose the follow artifacts for
On 10/29/2010 7:13 AM, Ted Zlatanov wrote:
> On Thu, 28 Oct 2010 14:46:15 -0700 Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>
> CS> Short answer: "YES Please, but we will still want a side channel for
> CS> minimum overhead."
>
> 100% agreed on both counts. But IIRC the fas
On 10/28/2010 2:56 PM, Eric Evans wrote:
> On Thu, 2010-10-28 at 14:46 -0700, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>> Short answer: "YES Please, but we will still want a side channel for
>> minimum overhead."
> Ok. Though I'm not sure I agree with the "minimum overhead&quo
Short answer: "YES Please, but we will still want a side channel for
minimum overhead."
Long answer: Query languages only work reliably when you have data
binding assistance (insert "Bobby Tables" xkcd here). However, they do
have the wonderful property of evolving aggressively without requiring
;> These settings look fine and I doubt you will see bizarre tiny files.
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:52 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>>>> OK, after upgrading to "apache-cassandra-2010-10-27_12-30-38", here's
>>>> what "show
I should have been more clear: rc1 is upgrade-in-place
> compatible with b2, so I would have liked to see what the settings
> were before running it through an export/import cycle.
>
> These settings look fine and I doubt you will see bizarre tiny files.
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 2:52
li, in which case you will need to upgrade
>>> to the nightly from
>>>
> http://hudson.zones.apache.org/hudson/job/Cassandra/lastSuccessfulBuild/artifact/cassandra/build/
>>> (essentially the same as rc1 being voted on).
>>>
>>> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 4
I set 60 clients to aggressively inserting into a 0.7.0beta2 standard
keyspace overnight. This morning, its heap usage is maxed, it's using
400% CPU (which is a lot less than the box has, so that's OK), and it's
making progress very... very... slowly. The timestamps near the end the
commit logs t
t/cassandra/build/
> (essentially the same as rc1 being voted on).
>
> On Wed, Oct 27, 2010 at 4:17 AM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
>> I recently tested 0.7.0beta2 with good results on a reasonably powerful
>> machine: 8 Xeon cores (16 if you count hyperthreads), 64G memory, and
&
I should add that the disk free space also changed, so the data
directory had a lot more space available than before:
/dev/cciss/c0d1 2.8T 202M 2.6T 1% /var/lib/cassandra/data
On 10/27/2010 2:17 AM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
> I recently tested 0.7.0beta2 with good results o
I recently tested 0.7.0beta2 with good results on a reasonably powerful
machine: 8 Xeon cores (16 if you count hyperthreads), 64G memory, and
some nice HP RAID. So far so good. But when I took the same config and
moved it to a basically identical box with 128G of memory, cassandra
started respond
isn't supposed to break avro serialization tho :(
On Wed, Aug 25, 2010 at 8:39 PM, Chip Salzenberg wrote:
I was using svn cassandra from about a week ago, and it worked for me; but
then I updated to today's and got the below error after rebuild.
Help, please: Should I apply some known c
I was using svn cassandra from about a week ago, and it worked for me;
but then I updated to today's and got the below error after rebuild.
Help, please: Should I apply some known config file change, or just
revert, or ?
The version failing is
https://svn.apache.org/repos/asf/cassandra/tr...@98
13 matches
Mail list logo
