Hi Brooke,
Very nice presentation:https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=QrP7G1eeQTI !! Good to
know that you are able to leverage Racks for gainingoperational efficiencies. I
think vnodes have made life easier.
I still see some concerns with Racks:
1. Usually scaling needs are driven by business
Keep in mind that you shouldn't just enable multiple racks on an existing
cluster (this will lead to massive inconsistencies). The best method is to
migrate to a new DC as Brooke mentioned.
I've never really understood why Datastax recommends against racks. In
those docs they make it out to be much more difficult than it actually is
to configure and manage racks.
The important thing to keep in mind when using racks is that your # of
racks should be equal to your RF. If you have
Hello Peng.
I think spending the time to set up your nodes into racks is worth it for
the benefits that it brings. With RF3 and NTS you can tolerate the loss of
a whole rack of nodes without losing QUORUM as each rack will contain a
full set of data. It makes ongoing cluster maintenance easier,
Hi Peng,
Three things are important when you are evaluating fault tolerance and
availability for your cluster:
1. RF2. CL3. Topology - how data is replicated in racks.
If you assume that N nodes from ANY rack may fail at the same time, then you
can afford failure of RF-CL nodes and still be
