Hi, Thanks for the pointer.
Following are some options given there, If you know where your live data begins, hint Cassandra with a start column, to reduce the scan times and the amount of tombstones to collect. A broker will usually have some notion of what’s next in the sequence and thus be able to do much more targeted queries, down to a single record if the storage strategy were to choose monotonic sequence numbers. We need to do is have some intelligence in using the system and avoid tombstones either use the pointed Column Name or use proper start column if slice query is used. Is that right or I am missing something here? Regards, Jagan ---- On Sat, 22 Feb 2014 20:55:39 +0530 DuyHai Doan<doanduy...@gmail.com> wrote ---- Jagan Queue-like data structures are known to be one of the worst anti patterns for Cassandra: http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/cassandra-anti-patterns-queues-and-queue-like-datasets On Sat, Feb 22, 2014 at 4:03 PM, Jagan Ranganathan <ja...@zohocorp.com> wrote: Hi, I need to decouple some of the work being processed from the user thread to provide better user experience. For that I need a queuing system with the following needs, High Availability No Data Loss Better Performance. Following are some libraries that were considered along with the limitation I see, Redis - Data Loss ZooKeeper - Not advised for Queue system. TokyoCabinet/SQLite/LevelDB - of this Level DB seem to be performing better. With replication requirement, I probably have to look at Apache ActiveMQ+LevelDB. After checking on the third option above, I kind of wonder if Cassandra with Leveled Compaction offer a similar system. Do you see any issues in such a usage or is there other better solutions available. Will be great to get insights on this. Regards, Jagan
