Do you have lot of sstables in L0? Since you moved from size tiered compaction with lot of data, it will take time for it to compact. You might want to increase the compaction settings to speed it up.
On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 12:33 PM, PARASHAR, BHASKARJYA JAY <bp1...@att.com>wrote: > Thanks Jake. Guess we will have to increase the size.**** > > ** ** > > *From:* Jake Luciani [mailto:jak...@gmail.com] > *Sent:* Tuesday, July 09, 2013 2:05 PM > *To:* user > *Subject:* Re: Leveled Compaction, number of SStables growing.**** > > ** ** > > We run with 128mb some run with 256mb. Leveled compaction creates fixed > sized sstables by design so this is the only way to lower the file count.* > *** > > ** ** > > On Tue, Jul 9, 2013 at 2:56 PM, PARASHAR, BHASKARJYA JAY <bp1...@att.com> > wrote:**** > > Hi,**** > > **** > > We recently switched from size tired compaction to Leveled compaction. We > made this change because our rows are frequently updated. We also have a > lot of data.**** > > With size-tiered compaction, we have about 5-10 sstables per CF. So with > about 15 CF’s we had about 100 sstables.**** > > With a sstable default sixe of 5mb, now after leveled compaction, we have > about 130k sstables and growing as the writes increases. There are a lot of > compaction jobs pending.**** > > If we increase the SStable size to 20mb, that will be about 30k sstables > but it’s still a lot.**** > > **** > > Is this common? Any solution, hints on reducing the sstables are welcome.* > *** > > **** > > Thanks**** > > -Jay**** > > > > **** > > ** ** > > -- > http://twitter.com/tjake ** ** >
