in Seeds can we specify domain name instead of ip address right now seeds is specifying ip address
On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:49 PM, Evan Weaver <[email protected]> wrote: > I sometimes have to use 127.0.0.1, at least when ListenAddress is > blank (auto-discover). Dunno if that has changed. > > Looks like this if you're successful: > > $ bin/nodeprobe --host 10.224.17.13 ring > Token(124007023942663924846758258675932114665) 3 10.224.17.13 |<--| > Token(106858063638814585506848525974047690568) 3 10.224.17.19 | ^ > Token(141130545721235451315477340120224986045) 3 10.224.17.14 |-->| > > Evan > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:24 PM, Michael Greene<[email protected]> > wrote: > > The port you're looking for is typically 8080, but if you only specify > > the host and not the port it shoudl work just fine. > > > > bin/nodeprobe -host localhost > > > > Michael > > > > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 6:18 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >> bin]$ ./nodeprobe -host localhost -port 8888 > >> Error connecting to remote JMX agent! > >> java.io.IOException: Failed to retrieve RMIServer stub: > >> javax.naming.CommunicationException [Root exception is > >> java.rmi.ConnectIOException: error during JRMP connection establishment; > >> nested exception is: > >> java.io.EOFException] > >> at > >> javax.management.remote.rmi.RMIConnector.connect(RMIConnector.java:342) > >> at > >> > javax.management.remote.JMXConnectorFactory.connect(JMXConnectorFactory.java:267) > >> at > org.apache.cassandra.tools.NodeProbe.connect(NodeProbe.java:149) > >> at > org.apache.cassandra.tools.NodeProbe.<init>(NodeProbe.java:111) > >> at org.apache.cassandra.tools.NodeProbe.main(NodeProbe.java:470) > >> Caused by: javax.naming.CommunicationException [Root exception is > >> java.rmi.ConnectIOException: error during JRMP connection establishment; > >> nested exception is: > >> java.io.EOFException] > >> at > >> > com.sun.jndi.rmi.registry.RegistryContext.lookup(RegistryContext.java:118) > >> at > >> > com.sun.jndi.toolkit.url.GenericURLContext.lookup(GenericURLContext.java:203) > >> at javax.naming.InitialContext.lookup(InitialContext.java:409) > >> at > >> > javax.management.remote.rmi.RMIConnector.findRMIServerJNDI(RMIConnector.java:1902) > >> at > >> > javax.management.remote.rmi.RMIConnector.findRMIServer(RMIConnector.java:1871) > >> at > >> javax.management.remote.rmi.RMIConnector.connect(RMIConnector.java:276) > >> ... 4 more > >> Caused by: java.rmi.ConnectIOException: error during JRMP connection > >> establishment; nested exception is: > >> java.io.EOFException > >> at > >> sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPChannel.createConnection(TCPChannel.java:304) > >> at > >> sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPChannel.newConnection(TCPChannel.java:202) > >> at sun.rmi.server.UnicastRef.newCall(UnicastRef.java:340) > >> at sun.rmi.registry.RegistryImpl_Stub.lookup(Unknown Source) > >> at > >> > com.sun.jndi.rmi.registry.RegistryContext.lookup(RegistryContext.java:114) > >> ... 9 more > >> Caused by: java.io.EOFException > >> at java.io.DataInputStream.readByte(DataInputStream.java:267) > >> at > >> sun.rmi.transport.tcp.TCPChannel.createConnection(TCPChannel.java:246) > >> ... 13 more > >> > >> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:17 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>> > >>> port 7002 doesnt trying nodeprobe > >>> > >>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 4:03 PM, Anthony Molinaro > >>> <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > >>>> Alternatively if you are using the 0.3 release you can point a browser > >>>> at port 7002 of one of the boxes and should see all the nodes in the > >>>> list. > >>>> > >>>> -Anthony > >>>> > >>>> On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 05:40:27PM -0500, Michael Greene wrote: > >>>> > You can use the nodeprobe utility in bin/ to contact each node and > >>>> > make sure they see the same information. Run it with no arguments > to > >>>> > see the commands you can pass it. > >>>> > > >>>> > There is also an open issue at > >>>> > https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-252 for making this > a > >>>> > little more automatic (instead of having to run nodeprobe on each > node > >>>> > and check the results by hand, you can just pass in all the servers > >>>> > that you think should be able to see each other) but there's no code > >>>> > for this yet. > >>>> > > >>>> > Michael > >>>> > > >>>> > On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 5:33 PM, <[email protected]> wrote: > >>>> > > Mark and Jonathan > >>>> > > I have started cassandra on 4 servers with all 4 of them as seeds > >>>> > > how do i know all 4 are now part of the datastore > >>>> > > are there ways to test this > >>>> > > thanks a lot > >>>> > > > >>>> > > On Tue, Jul 14, 2009 at 8:30 AM, Mark Robson <[email protected]> > >>>> > > wrote: > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> 2009/7/14 <[email protected]> > >>>> > >>> > >>>> > >>> 1. If you only have 3 production servers, Cassandra may not do > much > >>>> > >>> for > >>>> > >>> you. You will probably only care if you have lots more servers. > 3 > >>>> > >>> servers is > >>>> > >>> a reasonable minimum for a test / dev environment > >>>> > >>> At How many servers does cassandra start really performing? > >>>> > >>> or how many servers is an ideal setup say for a game 10? > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> It can use any number, three is probably a reasonable minimum, I > >>>> > >> don't > >>>> > >> know what the maximum is. > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> If you have a small number of servers, there is probably no > reason > >>>> > >> to use > >>>> > >> Cassandra; you can more usefully use a conventional database with > >>>> > >> replication or sharding. > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> The reason you might want to use Cassandra is to scale writes a > lot, > >>>> > >> to > >>>> > >> levels you couldn't reach with more "conventional" databases. > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> In all likelihood, an application would use Cassandra to store > >>>> > >> high-volume > >>>> > >> high-write data alongside a more conventional database to store > >>>> > >> smaller, > >>>> > >> less frequently changing stuff. > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> It appears to me that Cassandra 0.3 is only really useful if > running > >>>> > >> on a > >>>> > >> homogenous cluster of dedicated servers with reasonable amounts > of > >>>> > >> memory / > >>>> > >> storage (But not necessarily high spec servers of CPU, IO speed > or > >>>> > >> internal > >>>> > >> redundancy). > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> Once the load balancing is implemented in 0.5 (according to > current > >>>> > >> plans) > >>>> > >> it will become more useful for heterogenous environments. > >>>> > >> > >>>> > >> Mark > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > > >>>> > > -- > >>>> > > Bidegg worlds best auction site > >>>> > > http://bidegg.com > >>>> > > > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------ > >>>> Anthony Molinaro < > [email protected]> > >>> > >>> > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Bidegg worlds best auction site > >>> http://bidegg.com > >> > >> > >> > >> -- > >> Bidegg worlds best auction site > >> http://bidegg.com > >> > > > > > > -- > Evan Weaver > -- Bidegg worlds best auction site http://bidegg.com
