@cassandra.apache.org
Cc: Chris Lohfink
Subject: Re: no change observed in read latency after switching from EBS to SSD
storage
It is possible this is CPU bound. In 2.1 we have optimised the comparison of
clustering columns
(CASSANDRA-5417<https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5417>),
t;
>Mohammed
>
>From:Chris Lohfink [mailto:clohf...@blackbirdit.com]
>Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 7:17 PM
>
>To: user@cassandra.apache.org
>Subject: Re: no change observed in read latency after switching from EBS to
>SSD storage
>
>"Read 193311 live and
>
>
>
> *From:* Chris Lohfink [mailto:clohf...@blackbirdit.com]
> *Sent:* Wednesday, September 17, 2014 7:17 PM
>
> *To:* user@cassandra.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: no change observed in read latency after switching from
> EBS to SSD storage
>
>
>
> "Rea
12244832
Mohammed
From: Alex Major [mailto:al3...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 3:47 AM
To: user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>
Subject: Re: no change observed in read latency after switching from EBS to SSD
storage
When you say you moved from EBS to SSD
> 21:57:16,916 | 10.10.100.5 | 86494
> Merging data from memtables and 3 sstables | 21:57:16,916 | 10.10.100.5 |
> 86522
> Read 193311 live and 0 tombstoned cells | 21:57:24,552 | 10.10.100.5 |
> 7722425
> Request complete | 21:57:29,074 | 10.10.100.5 |
10.100.5 | 12244832
Mohammed
From: Alex Major [mailto:al3...@gmail.com]
Sent: Wednesday, September 17, 2014 3:47 AM
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: no change observed in read latency after switching from EBS to SSD
storage
When you say you moved from EBS to SSD, do you mean the
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 10:00 PM, Mohammed Guller
wrote:
> The 10 seconds latency that I gave earlier is from CQL tracing. Almost 5
> seconds out of that was taken up by the “merge memtable and sstables” step.
> The remaining 5 seconds are from “read live and tombstoned cells.”
>
Could you past
s running on the same node.
>
>
>
> Is there any performance tuning parameter in the cassandra.yaml file for
> large reads?
>
>
>
> Mohammed
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Coli [mailto:rc...@eventbrite.com]
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 16, 2014 5:42 PM
> *To:* user@ca
...@eventbrite.com]
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 5:42 PM
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: no change observed in read latency after switching from EBS to SSD
storage
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Mohammed Guller
mailto:moham...@glassbeam.com>> wrote:
Does anyone have insight as to why we
EBS vs local SSD in terms of latency you are using ms as your unit of
measurement.
If your query runs for 10s you will not notice anything. What is a few less
ms for the life of a 10 second query.
To reiterate what Rob said. The query is probably slow because of your use
case / data model, not the
If you cached your tables or the database you may not see any difference at all.
Regards,
-Tony
On Tuesday, September 16, 2014 6:36 PM, Mohammed Guller
wrote:
Hi -
We are running Cassandra 2.0.5 on AWS on m3.large instances. These instances
were using EBS for storage (I know it is no
in San Jose area or remote.
> Mailbox dimensions: 10"x12"x14"
>
> --
> *From:* Robert Coli
> *To:* "user@cassandra.apache.org"
> *Sent:* Tuesday, September 16, 2014 5:42 PM
> *Subject:* Re: no change observed in read laten
Sent: Tuesday, September 16, 2014 5:42 PM
Subject: Re: no change observed in read latency after switching from EBS to SSD
storage
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Mohammed Guller wrote:
Does anyone have insight as to why we don't see any performance impact on the
reads going from E
On Tue, Sep 16, 2014 at 5:35 PM, Mohammed Guller
wrote:
> Does anyone have insight as to why we don't see any performance impact on
> the reads going from EBS to SSD?
>
What does it say when you enable tracing on this CQL query?
10 seconds is a really long time to access anything in Cassandra.
Hi -
We are running Cassandra 2.0.5 on AWS on m3.large instances. These instances
were using EBS for storage (I know it is not recommended). We replaced the EBS
storage with SSDs. However, we didn't see any change in read latency. A query
that took 10 seconds when data was stored on EBS still t
15 matches
Mail list logo
