[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8340?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14567035#comment-14567035
]
Marcus Eriksson commented on CASSANDRA-8340:
--------------------------------------------
I doubt we should introduce this now - having many hard-to-explain
configuration options is bad thing.
For your use case, you should probably just run a custom compaction strategy as
I really hope it is not a common problem. For the people migrating from STCS,
we should probably build a major compaction for DTCS that splits data based on
its timestamps, but I have not heard any complaints about issues when migrating
to DTCS from STCS since DTCS was introduced.
> Use sstable min timestamp when deciding if an sstable should be included in
> DTCS compactions
> --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-8340
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-8340
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Marcus Eriksson
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: 8340-v2.diff, 8340.diff
>
>
> Currently we check how old the newest data (max timestamp) in an sstable is
> when we check if it should be compacted.
> If we instead switch to using min timestamp for this we have a pretty clean
> migration path from STCS/LCS to DTCS.
> My thinking is that before migrating, the user does a major compaction, which
> creates a huge sstable containing all data, with min timestamp very far back
> in time, then switching to DTCS, we will have a big sstable that we never
> compact (ie, min timestamp of this big sstable is before
> max_sstable_age_days), and all newer data will be after that, and that new
> data will be properly compacted
> WDYT [~Bj0rn] ?
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
