[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5515?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13714563#comment-13714563
]
Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-5515:
-------------------------------------------
Either time-based throttle or sync-on-compaction seems reasonable to me.
Leaning towards the former since write:read ratio may be low.
If we're not going to take the simple approach with a map, should we keep more
data like this?
{code}
CREATE TABLE sstable_activity (
keyspace text,
columnfamily text,
generation int,
hour_ending_at timestamp,
reads int,
PRIMARY KEY ((keyspace, columnfamily, generation), hour_ending_at)
)
{code}
Delete-on-removal + TTL sounds right.
> Track sstable coldness
> ----------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-5515
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5515
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Components: Core
> Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
> Assignee: Tyler Hobbs
> Fix For: 2.0.1
>
> Attachments: 0001-Track-row-read-counts-in-SSTR.patch
>
>
> Keeping a count of reads per-sstable would allow STCS to automatically ignore
> cold data rather than recompacting it constantly with hot data, dramatically
> reducing compaction load for typical time series applications and others with
> time-correlated access patterns. We would not need a separate age-tiered
> compaction strategy.
> (This will really be useful in conjunction with CASSANDRA-5514.)
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
If you think it was sent incorrectly, please contact your JIRA administrators
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
