Thank you very much for your response. The considerations mentioned are the ones that I was expecting. I believe that I am good to go. I just wanted to make sure that there was no need to run any other extra command beside that one.
Best, Sergio On Tue, Jan 21, 2020, 3:55 PM Jeff Jirsa <jji...@gmail.com> wrote: > Note that if you're actually running repairs within 5 days, and you adjust > this to 8, you may stream a bunch of tombstones across in that 5-8 day > window, which can increase disk usage / compaction (because as you pass 5 > days, one replica may gc away the tombstones, the others may not because > the tombstones shadow data, so you'll re-stream the tombstone to the other > replicas) > > On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 3:28 PM Elliott Sims <elli...@backblaze.com> > wrote: > >> In addition to extra space, queries can potentially be more expensive >> because more dead rows and tombstones will need to be scanned. How much of >> a difference this makes will depend drastically on the schema and access >> pattern, but I wouldn't expect going from 5 days to 8 to be very noticeable. >> >> On Tue, Jan 21, 2020 at 2:14 PM Sergio <lapostadiser...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> https://stackoverflow.com/a/22030790 >>> >>> >>> For CQLSH >>> >>> alter table <table_name> with GC_GRACE_SECONDS = <seconds>; >>> >>> >>> >>> Il giorno mar 21 gen 2020 alle ore 13:12 Sergio < >>> lapostadiser...@gmail.com> ha scritto: >>> >>>> Hi guys! >>>> >>>> I just wanted to confirm with you before doing such an operation. I >>>> expect to increase the space but nothing more than this. I need to perform >>>> just : >>>> >>>> UPDATE COLUMN FAMILY cf with GC_GRACE = 691,200; //8 days >>>> >>>> Is it correct? >>>> >>>> Thanks, >>>> >>>> Sergio >>>> >>>
