[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16203?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=17400360#comment-17400360
]
Brandon Williams edited comment on CASSANDRA-16203 at 8/17/21, 12:37 PM:
-------------------------------------------------------------------------
Well, again since strategies are pluggable, I don't think it really matters.
Nobody loses anything or takes on any risk regardless of where this gets
merged, unless they choose to use it. I think of this as analogous to another
compaction strategy.
was (Author: brandon.williams):
Well, again since strategies are pluggable, I don't think it really matters.
Nobody loses anything or takes on any risk regardless of where this gets
merged, unless they choose to use it.
> Rack Aware Topology Strategy
> ----------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-16203
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-16203
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Cluster/Membership
> Reporter: Cameron Zemek
> Assignee: Cameron Zemek
> Priority: Normal
> Fix For: 5.x
>
> Attachments: rackaware.patch
>
>
> If replication factor > racks then NetworkTopologyStrategy assigns the extras
> in ring order. This means losing a rack can result in the loss of quorum. I
> have implemented a similar topology strategy that evenly distributes replicas
> across racks.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian Jira
(v8.3.4#803005)
---------------------------------------------------------------------
To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected]
For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected]
