Thank you Rob, that's all really useful information. As our production cluster is going to grow over time it looks like we may need to stick with vnodes (but maybe not 256) and as you say hope the work to improve their inefficiencies progresses quite quickly.
> In real reality, vnodes were almost certainly set to default in 2.0 so > that they could be hardened by both early adopters (cassandra experts) and > noobs (cassandra anti-experts) encountering problems with this default. As > Eric Evans mentioned at the time in a related post, this is to some extent > the reality of open source software development. Where he and I appear to > disagree is on whether it is reasonable to set new features as defaults > and thereby use noobs as part of your QA process for same. I totally agree with you here. As a 'noob' reading through the Cassandra documentation before installing for the first time everything pushes you toward using vnodes. It's not until you start reading in forums such as this, blog posts, and JIRA issues that it becomes clear that they do come with caveats. I'll look forward to the 'always-specify-initial_token best practice' post. Thanks, Phil -- View this message in context: http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Change-number-of-vnodes-on-an-existing-cluster-tp7594646p7594661.html Sent from the cassandra-u...@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
