[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3047?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13293899#comment-13293899
]
David Alves commented on CASSANDRA-3047:
----------------------------------------
I'm thinking about producing slightly different output for different
strategies. It's a bit difficult to understand the output without knowing the
strategy/replication factor and if it if is dc aware or not.
something like changing:
{code}
Address DC Rack Status State Load
Effective-Ownership Token
148873535527910577765226390751398592512
127.0.0.1 DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 49.76 KB 16.66%
0
127.0.0.2 DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 40 KB 16.66%
21267647932558653966460912964485513216
127.0.0.3 DC1 RAC2 Up Normal 63.45 KB 16.66%
42535295865117307932921825928971026432
127.0.0.4 DC1 RAC2 Up Normal 49.76 KB 16.66%
63802943797675961899382738893456539648
127.0.0.5 DC2 RAC1 Up Normal 49.76 KB 16.66%
85070591730234615865843651857942052864
127.0.0.6 DC2 RAC1 Up Normal 40 KB 16.66%
106338239662793269832304564822427566080
{code}
into
{code}
Keyspace: myKeyspace DataCenter aware? yes Strategy: NetworkTopologyStragey
DC Replicas Address Rack Status State Load
Effective-Ownership Token
DC1 1 127.0.0.1 RAC1 Up Normal 40 KB 100.0%
0
DC2 1 127.0.0.2 RAC1 Up Normal 40 KB 50.0%
0
DC2 - 127.0.0.3 RAC2 Up Normal 40 KB 50.0%
8...
DC3 2 127.0.0.4 RAC1 Up Normal 40 KB 50.0%
0
DC3 - 127.0.0.5 RAC1 Up Normal 40 KB 50.0%
4...
DC3 - 127.0.0.6 RAC2 Up Normal 40 KB 50.0%
8...
DC3 - 127.0.0.7 RAC2 Up Normal 40 KB 50.0%
12...
Total Replicas: 4
{code}
what do you think?
> implementations of IPartitioner.describeOwnership() are not DC aware
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-3047
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-3047
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Tools
> Reporter: Aaron Morton
> Assignee: David Alves
> Priority: Trivial
> Fix For: 1.1.2
>
>
> see http://www.mail-archive.com/[email protected]/msg16375.html
> When a cluster the multiple rings approach to tokens the output from nodetool
> ring is incorrect.
> When it uses the interleaved token approach (e.g. dc1, dc2, dc1, dc2) it will
> be correct.
> It's a bit hacky but could we special case (RP) tokens that are off by 1 and
> calculate the ownership per dc ? I guess another approach would be to add
> some parameters so the partitioner can be told about the token assignment
> strategy.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators:
https://issues.apache.org/jira/secure/ContactAdministrators!default.jspa
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
