[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8032?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14159487#comment-14159487
]
mck edited comment on CASSANDRA-8032 at 10/5/14 9:33 AM:
---------------------------------------------------------
[~iamaleksey] I was unaware originally that request_scheduler was only
implemented against the thrift api, and never for cql.
So i guess the question, ie CASSANDRA-8059, is whether to implement
request_scheduler for cql, or to remove it along with thrift?
was (Author: michaelsembwever):
[~iamaleksey] I was unaware originally that request_scheduler was only
implemented against the thrift api, and never for cql.
So guess the question, ie CASSANDRA-8059, is whether to implement
request_scheduler for cql, or to remove it along with thrift?
> User based request scheduler
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-8032
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8032
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Core
> Reporter: mck
> Assignee: mck
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: patch
> Attachments: v1-0001-CASSANDRA-8032-User-based-request-scheduler.txt
>
>
> Today only a keyspace based request scheduler exists.
> Post CASSANDRA-4898 it could be possible to implement a request_scheduler
> based on users (from system_auth.credentials) rather than keyspaces. This
> could offer a finer granularity of control, from read-only vs read-write
> users on keyspaces, to application dedicated vs ad-hoc users. Alternatively
> it could also offer a granularity larger and easier to work with than per
> keyspace.
> The request scheduler is a useful concept but i think that setups with enough
> nodes often favour separate clusters rather than either creating separate
> virtual datacenters or using the request scheduler. To give the request
> scheduler another, and more flexible, implementation could especially help
> those users that don't yet have enough nodes to warrant separate clusters, or
> even separate virtual datacenters. On such smaller clusters cassandra can
> still be seen as an unstable technology because poor consumers/schemas can
> easily affect, even bring down, a whole cluster.
> I haven't look into the feasibility of this within the code, but it comes to
> mind as rather simple, and i would be interested in offering a patch if the
> idea carries validity.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
