[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4650?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15382767#comment-15382767
 ] 

T Jake Luciani commented on CASSANDRA-4650:
-------------------------------------------

I looked over the patch and I like the idea.  

My questions are:

* It wasn't clear what you are using to define capacity?  Ideally size per 
range but we probably don't disseminate that.
* Can you kick off tests and dtests? or should I do it for you?  


> RangeStreamer should be smarter when picking endpoints for streaming in case 
> of N >=3 in each DC.  
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-4650
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-4650
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Improvement
>    Affects Versions: 1.1.5
>            Reporter: sankalp kohli
>            Assignee: sankalp kohli
>            Priority: Minor
>              Labels: streaming
>         Attachments: CASSANDRA-4650_trunk.txt, photo-1.JPG
>
>   Original Estimate: 24h
>  Remaining Estimate: 24h
>
> getRangeFetchMap method in RangeStreamer should pick unique nodes to stream 
> data from when number of replicas in each DC is three or more. 
> When N>=3 in a DC, there are two options for streaming a range. Consider an 
> example of 4 nodes in one datacenter and replication factor of 3. 
> If a node goes down, it needs to recover 3 ranges of data. With current code, 
> two nodes could get selected as it orders the node by proximity. 
> We ideally will want to select 3 nodes for streaming the data. We can do this 
> by selecting unique nodes for each range.  
> Advantages:
> This will increase the performance of bootstrapping a node and will also put 
> less pressure on nodes serving the data. 
> Note: This does not affect if N < 3 in each DC as then it streams data from 
> only 2 nodes. 



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

Reply via email to