What is the consistency level you are using ? And as Ed said, if you can provide the stacktrace that would help too.
On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 7:02 PM, aaron morton <aa...@thelastpickle.com>wrote: > btw, the nodes are a tad out of balance was that deliberate ? > > http://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/Operations#Token_selection > http://wiki.apache.org/cassandra/Operations#Load_balancing > > > Aaron > > On 10 Apr 2011, at 08:44, Ed Anuff wrote: > > Sounds like the problem might be on the hector side. Lots of hector > users on this list, but usually not a bad idea to ask on > hector-us...@googlegroups.com (cc'd). > > The jetty servers stopping responding is a bit vague, somewhere in > your logs is an error message that should shed some light on where > things are going awry. If you can find the exception that's being > thrown in hector and post that, it'd make it much easier to help you > out. > > Ed > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 12:11 PM, Vram Kouramajian > <vram.kouramaj...@gmail.com> wrote: > > The hector clients are used as part of our jetty servers. And, the > > jetty servers stop responding when one of the Cassandra nodes go down. > > > Vram > > > On Sat, Apr 9, 2011 at 11:54 AM, Joe Stump <j...@joestump.net> wrote: > > Did the Cassandra cluster go down or did you start getting failures from > the client when it routed queries to the downed node? The key in the client > is to keep working around the ring if the initial node is down. > > > --Joe > > > On Apr 9, 2011, at 12:52 PM, Vram Kouramajian wrote: > > > We have a 5 Cassandra nodes with the following configuration: > > > Casandra Version: 0.6.11 > > Number of Nodes: 5 > > Replication Factor: 3 > > Client: Hector 0.6.0-14 > > Write Consistency Level: Quorum > > Read Consistency Level: Quorum > > Ring Topology: > > Owns Range Ring > > > 132756707369141912386052673276321963528 > > 192.168.89.153Up 4.15 GB 33.87% > > 20237398133070283622632741498697119875 |<--| > > 192.168.89.155Up 5.17 GB 18.29% > > 51358066040236348437506517944084891398 | ^ > > 192.168.89.154Up 7.41 GB 33.97% > > 109158969152851862753910401160326064203 v | > > 192.168.89.152Up 5.07 GB 6.34% > > 119944993359936402983569623214763193674 | ^ > > 192.168.89.151Up 4.22 GB 7.53% > > 132756707369141912386052673276321963528 |-->| > > > We believe that our setup should survive the crash of one of the > > Cassandra nodes. But, we had few crashes and the system stopped > > functioning until we brought back the Cassandra nodes. > > > Any clues? > > > Vram > > > > > >
