[ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11920?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]
Arindam Gupta updated CASSANDRA-11920: -------------------------------------- Reviewer: Tyler Hobbs Reproduced In: 3.0.3 Tester: ADARSH KUMAR Status: Patch Available (was: Open) attached the patch with the fix. I have not added any unit test as could not find corresponding unit test files for these classes, however tested it with cqlsh. > bloom_filter_fp_chance needs to be validated up front > ----------------------------------------------------- > > Key: CASSANDRA-11920 > URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-11920 > Project: Cassandra > Issue Type: Bug > Components: Lifecycle, Local Write-Read Paths > Reporter: ADARSH KUMAR > Labels: lhf > Attachments: 11920-3.0.txt > > > Hi, > I was doing some bench-marking on bloom_filter_fp_chance values. Everything > worked fine for values .01(default for STCS), .001, .0001. But when I set > bloom_filter_fp_chance = .00001 i observed following behaviour: > 1). Reads and writes looked normal from cqlsh. > 2). SSttables are never created. > 3). It just creates two files (*-Data.db and *-index.db) of size 0kb. > 4). nodetool flush does not work and produce following exception: > java.lang.UnsupportedOperationException: Unable to satisfy 1.0E-5 with 20 > buckets per element > at > org.apache.cassandra.utils.BloomCalculations.computeBloomSpec(BloomCalculations.java:150) > ..... > I checked BloomCalculations class and following lines are responsible for > this exception: > if (maxFalsePosProb < probs[maxBucketsPerElement][maxK]) { > throw new UnsupportedOperationException(String.format("Unable to > satisfy %s with %s buckets per element", > maxFalsePosProb, > maxBucketsPerElement)); > } > From the code it looks like a hard coaded validation (unless we can change > the nuber of buckets). > So, if this validation is hard coaded then why it is even allowed to set such > value of bloom_fileter_fp_chance, that can prevent ssTable generation? > Please correct this issue. -- This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA (v6.3.4#6332)