Ben, I just read through those two tickets. It's scarier than I thought. Thank you for all the investigations and comments.
On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:31 AM, Benjamin Roth <benjamin.r...@jaumo.com> wrote: > A little experience report on MVs: > > We use them in production (3.10-trunk) and they work really well on normal > read/write operations but streaming operations (bootstrap, repair, rebuild, > decommision) can kill your cluster and/or your nerves. > We will stay with MVs as we need them and want them. > I rolled out a patch on MV streaming on our production cluster a few hours > ago as we had problems with bootstrapping new nodes. > > Before: > - Error log was completely flooded with WTEs > - Bootstrap either failed due to exceptions or wasn't even close to finish > after 24h - it just did not work > > After > - Bootstrap finished without a single error log after less than 5:30h > > I started to roll out that patch to the whole cluster to see how repairs > are affected. Will keep you updated. > > There is no dedicated JIRA issue assigned as it addresses multiple tickets > like CASSANDRA-12905 + CASSANDRA-12888 > > > 2016-12-01 16:21 GMT+01:00 Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com>: > >> I agree with everything you just said, Kai. I'd start a new project with >> 3.0.10. I'd stay away from MVs though. >> >> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 10:19 AM Kai Wang <dep...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Just based on a few observations on this list. Not one week goes by >>> without people asking which release is the most stable on 3.x line. Folks >>> at instaclustr also provide their own 3.x fork for stability issues. etc >>> >>> We developers already have enough to think about. I really don't feel >>> like spending time researching which release of C* I should choose. So for >>> me, 2.2.x is the choice in production. >>> >>> That being said, I have nothing against 3.x. I do like its new storage >>> engine. If I start a brand new project today with zero previous C* >>> experience, I probably would choose 3.0.10 as my starting point. However if >>> I were to upgrade to 3.x, I would have to test it thoroughly in a dev >>> environment with real production load and monitor it very closely on >>> performance, compaction, repair, bootstrap, replacing etc. Data is simply >>> too important to take chances with. >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 9:38 AM, Shalom Sagges <shal...@liveperson.com> >>> wrote: >>> >>> Hey Kai, >>> >>> Thanks for the info. Can you please elaborate on the reasons you'd pick >>> 2.2.6 over 3.0? >>> >>> >>> Shalom Sagges >>> DBA >>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035> >>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson> >>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections >>> >>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig> >>> >>> >>> On Thu, Dec 1, 2016 at 2:26 PM, Kai Wang <dep...@gmail.com> wrote: >>> >>> I have been running 2.2.6 in production. As of today I would still pick >>> it over 3.x for production. >>> >>> On Nov 30, 2016 5:42 AM, "Shalom Sagges" <shal...@liveperson.com> wrote: >>> >>> Hi Everyone, >>> >>> I'm about to upgrade our 2.0.14 version to a newer 2.x version. >>> At first I thought of upgrading to 2.2.8, but I'm not sure how stable it >>> is, as I understand the 2.2 version was supposed to be a sort of beta >>> version for 3.0 feature-wise, whereas 3.0 upgrade will mainly handle the >>> storage modifications (please correct me if I'm wrong). >>> >>> So my question is, if I need a 2.x version (can't upgrade to 3 due to >>> client considerations), which one should I choose, 2.1.x or 2.2.x? (I'm >>> don't require any new features available in 2.2). >>> >>> Thanks! >>> >>> Shalom Sagges >>> DBA >>> T: +972-74-700-4035 <+972%2074-700-4035> >>> <http://www.linkedin.com/company/164748> <http://twitter.com/liveperson> >>> <http://www.facebook.com/LivePersonInc> We Create Meaningful Connections >>> >>> <https://engage.liveperson.com/idc-mobile-first-consumer/?utm_medium=email&utm_source=mkto&utm_campaign=idcsig> >>> >>> >>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. >>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of >>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this >>> message or any information herein. >>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender >>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you. >>> >>> >>> >>> This message may contain confidential and/or privileged information. >>> If you are not the addressee or authorized to receive this on behalf of >>> the addressee you must not use, copy, disclose or take action based on this >>> message or any information herein. >>> If you have received this message in error, please advise the sender >>> immediately by reply email and delete this message. Thank you. >>> >>> >>> > > > -- > Benjamin Roth > Prokurist > > Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com > Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany > Phone +49 7161 304880-6 <+49%207161%203048806> · Fax +49 7161 304880-1 > <+49%207161%203048801> > AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer >
