[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8833?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14327699#comment-14327699
 ] 

Benedict commented on CASSANDRA-8833:
-------------------------------------

The TL;DR of my view is: We've only just really (or nearly) finished the work 
for this, and many of its problems have been more general than just it. So 
aborting now is premature. However it is broader in scope than originally 
envisaged, and it has been painful - especially for Marcus (and also for 
myself) - so I understand the desire to see the back of it, and won't fight for 
its retention.

> Stop opening compaction results early
> -------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-8833
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8833
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>            Reporter: Marcus Eriksson
>             Fix For: 2.1.4
>
>
> We should simplify the code base by not doing early opening of compaction 
> results. It makes it very hard to reason about sstable life cycles since they 
> can be in many different states, "opened early", "starts moved", "shadowed", 
> "final", instead of as before, basically just one (tmp files are not really 
> 'live' yet so I don't count those). The ref counting of shared resources 
> between sstables in these different states is also hard to reason about. This 
> has caused quite a few issues since we released 2.1
> I think it all boils down to a performance vs code complexity issue, is 
> opening compaction results early really 'worth it' wrt the performance gain? 
> The results in CASSANDRA-6916 sure look like the benefits are big enough, but 
> the difference should not be as big for people on SSDs (which most people who 
> care about latencies are)
> WDYT [~benedict] [~jbellis] [~iamaleksey] [~JoshuaMcKenzie]?



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)

Reply via email to