[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11853?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15298332#comment-15298332
]
T Jake Luciani commented on CASSANDRA-11853:
--------------------------------------------
.bq If the rate limit is too high the results should reflect the failure IMO.
You asked for 100K per sec and the cluster can only serve 1K would lead to
breached SLA in real life and the reported latencies will reflect it. The
results make perfect sense in that they show failure.
But the option isn't "sla" it's "throttle" so to me adding a throttle shouldn't
cause an adverse affect. Maybe we should introduce a new option? Would
something like CASSANDRA-8686 fit better?
> Improve Cassandra-Stress latency measurement
> --------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-11853
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11853
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Tools
> Reporter: Nitsan Wakart
> Assignee: Nitsan Wakart
> Fix For: 3.x
>
>
> Currently CS reports latency using a sampling latency container and reporting
> service time (as opposed to response time from intended schedule) leading to
> coordinated omission.
> Fixed here:
> https://github.com/nitsanw/cassandra/tree/co-correction
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
