[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14160?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17380169#comment-17380169
]
Ekaterina Dimitrova edited comment on CASSANDRA-14160 at 7/13/21, 9:11 PM:
---------------------------------------------------------------------------
Hi [~josnyder], [~marcuse], [~jjirsa],
I am trying to look at tickets which need a reviewer and I saw this one and I
was wondering was there any further discussion?
was (Author: e.dimitrova):
Hi [~josnyder], [~marcuse], [~jjirsa],
I am trying to look at tickets which need a reviewer and I saw this one.
Was there any further discussion?
> maxPurgeableTimestamp should traverse tables in order of minTimestamp
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-14160
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-14160
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Local/Compaction
> Reporter: Josh Snyder
> Assignee: Josh Snyder
> Priority: Normal
> Labels: performance
> Fix For: 4.x
>
>
> In maxPurgeableTimestamp, we iterate over the bloom filters of each
> overlapping SSTable. Of the bloom filter hits, we take the SSTable with the
> lowest minTimestamp. If we kept the SSTables in sorted order of minTimestamp,
> then we could short-circuit the operation at the first bloom filter hit,
> reducing cache pressure (or worse, I/O) and CPU time.
> I've written (but not yet benchmarked) [some
> code|https://github.com/hashbrowncipher/cassandra/commit/29859a4a2e617f6775be49448858bc59fdafab44]
> to demonstrate this possibility.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
