I may have misunderstood, but it seems that he was already using LeveledCompaction
On Tue, Apr 7, 2015 at 3:17 AM, DuyHai Doan <doanduy...@gmail.com> wrote: > If you have SSD, you may afford switching to leveled compaction strategy, > which requires much less than 50% of the current dataset for free space > Le 5 avr. 2015 19:04, "daemeon reiydelle" <daeme...@gmail.com> a écrit : > >> You appear to have multiple java binaries in your path. That needs to be >> resolved. >> >> sent from my mobile >> Daemeon C.M. Reiydelle >> USA 415.501.0198 >> London +44.0.20.8144.9872 >> On Apr 5, 2015 1:40 AM, "Jean Tremblay" < >> jean.tremb...@zen-innovations.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi, >>> I have a cluster of 5 nodes. We use cassandra 2.1.3. >>> >>> The 5 nodes use about 50-57% of the 1T SSD. >>> One node managed to compact all its data. During one compaction this >>> node used almost 100% of the drive. The other nodes refuse to continue >>> compaction claiming that there is not enough disk space. >>> >>> From the documentation LeveledCompactionStrategy should be able to >>> compact my data, well at least this is what I understand. >>> >>> <<Size-tiered compaction requires at least as much free disk space for >>> compaction as the size of the largest column family. Leveled compaction >>> needs much less space for compaction, only 10 * sstable_size_in_mb. >>> However, even if you’re using leveled compaction, you should leave much >>> more free disk space available than this to accommodate streaming, repair, >>> and snapshots, which can easily use 10GB or more of disk space. >>> Furthermore, disk performance tends to decline after 80 to 90% of the disk >>> space is used, so don’t push the boundaries.>> >>> >>> This is the disk usage. Node 4 is the only one that could compact >>> everything. >>> node0: /dev/disk1 931Gi 534Gi 396Gi 57% / >>> node1: /dev/disk1 931Gi 513Gi 417Gi 55% / >>> node2: /dev/disk1 931Gi 526Gi 404Gi 57% / >>> node3: /dev/disk1 931Gi 507Gi 424Gi 54% / >>> node4: /dev/disk1 931Gi 475Gi 456Gi 51% / >>> >>> When I try to compact the other ones I get this: >>> >>> objc[18698]: Class JavaLaunchHelper is implemented in both >>> /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_40.jdk/Contents/Home/bin/java >>> and /Library/Java/JavaVirtualMachines/jdk1.8.0_ >>> 40.jdk/Contents/Home/jre/lib/libinstrument.dylib. One of the two will >>> be used. Which one is undefined. >>> error: Not enough space for compaction, estimated sstables = 2894, >>> expected write size = 485616651726 >>> -- StackTrace -- >>> java.lang.RuntimeException: Not enough space for compaction, estimated >>> sstables = 2894, expected write size = 485616651726 >>> at org.apache.cassandra.db.compaction.CompactionTask. >>> checkAvailableDiskSpace(CompactionTask.java:293) >>> at org.apache.cassandra.db.compaction.CompactionTask. >>> runMayThrow(CompactionTask.java:127) >>> at org.apache.cassandra.utils.WrappedRunnable.run( >>> WrappedRunnable.java:28) >>> at org.apache.cassandra.db.compaction.CompactionTask.executeInternal( >>> CompactionTask.java:76) >>> at org.apache.cassandra.db.compaction.AbstractCompactionTask.execute( >>> AbstractCompactionTask.java:59) >>> at org.apache.cassandra.db.compaction.CompactionManager$7.runMayThrow( >>> CompactionManager.java:512) >>> at org.apache.cassandra.utils.WrappedRunnable.run( >>> WrappedRunnable.java:28) >>> >>> I did not set the sstable_size_in_mb I use the 160MB default. >>> >>> Is it normal that during compaction it needs so much diskspace? What >>> would be the best solution to overcome this problem? >>> >>> Thanks for your help >>> >>>
