[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8739?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14327989#comment-14327989
]
Carl Yeksigian commented on CASSANDRA-8739:
-------------------------------------------
I'm not sure how the change to the way it calculates the L0 compacting makes a
difference; it seems like they should be the same.
The new L0 overlapping check makes sense.
> Don't check for overlap with sstables that have had their start positions
> moved in LCS
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-8739
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8739
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: Marcus Eriksson
> Assignee: Marcus Eriksson
> Fix For: 2.1.4
>
> Attachments: 0001-8739.patch
>
>
> When picking compaction candidates in LCS, we check that we won't cause any
> overlap in the higher level. Problem is that we compare the files that have
> had their start positions moved meaning we can cause overlap. We need to also
> include the tmplink files when checking this.
> Note that in 2.1 overlap is not as big problem as earlier, if adding an
> sstable would cause overlap, we send it back to L0 instead, meaning we do a
> bit more compaction but we never actually have overlap.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
