You can create the schema in advance with custom table options and stress will
happily use it as-is
--
Jeff Jirsa
> On Sep 4, 2017, at 10:25 AM, Akshit Jain wrote:
>
> Hi,
> Is there any way to set the gc_grace_seconds parameter in the stress tool
> command?
>
>
Hi,
Is there any way to set the *gc_grace_seconds* parameter in the stress tool
command?
Regards
Hello Kurt,
Thanks for the help :)
On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at 1:12 PM, Jai Bheemsen Rao Dhanwada <
jaibheem...@gmail.com> wrote:
> yes looks like I am missing that.
>
> Let me test on one node and try a full cluster restore.
>
> will update here once I complete my test
>
> On Fri, Sep 1, 2017 at
Thanks! :-)
On Mon, Sep 4, 2017 at 2:56 PM, Nicolas Guyomar
wrote:
> Wrong copy/paste !
>
> Looking at the code, it should do nothing :
>
> // look up the sstables now that we're on the compaction executor, so we
> don't try to re-compact
> // something that was
I'm going to try different options. Do any of you have some experience
with tweaking one of those conf parameters to improve read throughput,
especially in case of counter tables ?
1/ using SSD :
trickle_fsync: true
trickle_fsync_interval_in_kb: 1024
2/ concurrent_compactors to the number of
It can happen on any of the nodes. We can have a large number of pending
on ReadStage and CounterMutationStage. We'll try to increase
concurrent_counter_writes to see how it changes things
Likely. I believe counter mutations are a tad more expensive than a
normal mutation. If you're doing a
Likely. I believe counter mutations are a tad more expensive than a normal
mutation. If you're doing a lot of counter updates that probably doesn't
help. Regardless, high amounts of pending reads/mutations is generally not
good and indicates the node being overloaded. Are you just seeing this on
Try checking the Percent Repaired reported in nodetool cfstats
Wrong copy/paste !
Looking at the code, it should do nothing :
// look up the sstables now that we're on the compaction executor, so we
don't try to re-compact
// something that was already being compacted earlier.
On 4 September 2017 at 13:54, Nicolas Guyomar
You'll get the WARN "Will not compact {}: it is not an active sstable" :)
On 4 September 2017 at 12:07, Shalom Sagges wrote:
> By the way, does anyone know what happens if I run a user defined
> compaction on an sstable that's already in compaction?
>
>
>
>
>
>
> On
By the way, does anyone know what happens if I run a user defined
compaction on an sstable that's already in compaction?
On Sun, Sep 3, 2017 at 2:55 PM, Shalom Sagges
wrote:
> Try this blog by The Last Pickle:
>
>
11 matches
Mail list logo