Missed the heap part, not sure why is that happening
On Tue, Aug 3, 2021 at 8:59 AM manish khandelwal <
manishkhandelwa...@gmail.com> wrote:
> mmap is used for faster reads and as you guessed right you might see read
> performance degradation. If you are seeing high memory usage after repairs
>
mmap is used for faster reads and as you guessed right you might see read
performance degradation. If you are seeing high memory usage after repairs
due to mmaped files, the only way to reduce the memory usage is to trigger
some other process which requires memory. *mmapped* files use buffer/cache
Can anyone please help with the above questions? To summarise:
1) What is the impact of using mmap only for indices besides a degradation
in read performance?
2) Why does the off heap consumed during Cassandra full repair remains
occupied 12+ hours after the repair completion and is there a
Thank you Max. That is a solid choice. You can even configure each
blade with two 15TBytes SSDs (may not be wise), but that would yield
~430TBytes of SSD across 14 nodes in 4u space for around $150k.
-Joe
On 8/2/2021 4:29 PM, Max C. wrote:
Have you considered a blade chassis? Then you can
Have you considered a blade chassis? Then you can get most of the redundancy
of having lots of small nodes in few(er) rack units.
SuperMicro has a chassis that can accommodate 14 servers in 4U:
https://www.supermicro.com/en/products/superblade/enclosure#4U
- Max
> On Aug 2, 2021, at 12:05
Thank you Jeff. Consider that if rack space is at a premium, what would
make the most sense?
-Joe
On 8/2/2021 2:46 PM, Jeff Jirsa wrote:
IF you bought a server with that topology, you would definitely want
to run lots of instances, perhaps 24, to effectively utilize that disk
space.
You'd
IF you bought a server with that topology, you would definitely want to run
lots of instances, perhaps 24, to effectively utilize that disk space.
You'd also need 24 IPs, and you'd need a NIC that could send/receive 24x
the normal bandwidth. And the cost of rebuilding such a node would be 24x
We have a large amount of data to be stored in Cassandra, and if we were
to purchase new hardware in limited space, what would make the most sense?
Dell has machines with 24, 8TByte drives in a 2u configuration. Given
Cassandra's limitations (?) to large nodes, would it make sense to run
24
