Agreed. Most teams I’ve worked with are on EBS. It’s significantly cheaper for denser storage. I’m running 15-20TB nodes. Ever since we merged CASSANDRA-15452, its worked really well.
Anyone using k8s is probably using EBS. On Tue, Oct 6, 2026 at 12:20 PM Jeff Jirsa <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > On Oct 6, 2026, at 4:49 AM, Benedict <[email protected]> wrote: > > > > > >> > >> This feature primarily benefits a narrow and not recommended use case > (EBS), and our roadmap expects to obsolete it. The first draft increases > the core codebase size by around 1%, and more for later phases - this isn’t > small. > > > > Sorry, in my edits for brevity I lost the point I was making here. Given > the narrower benefit and lifetime of the feature, and non-trivial cost, we > should try to see if we have alternatives that yield a stronger > cost:benefit ratio. > > > > FWIW, I think cheap partial range streaming is an independently > important thing we want to achieve, that is of long term benefit to the > project - and I am not opposed to these other improvements in principle > either. > > > >> On 6 Oct 2026, at 11:14, Benedict Elliott Smith <[email protected]> > wrote: > >> > >> Hi Chris, > >> > >>> I think you would agree that complexity alone is not a reason to > reject a design. You described Accord as “likely the most complex thing we > have ever merged to the project,” > >> > >> Yes, we are discussing cost:benefit. Many proposals are subject to > debate, and I am sure you will recall that Accord was by no means exempted > from this. > >> > >> This feature primarily benefits a narrow and not recommended use case > (EBS), and our roadmap expects to obsolete it. The first draft increases > the core codebase size by around 1%, and more for later phases - this isn’t > small. > >>> > > It’s not that narrow, and I dont know that I’d agree about it being > not-recommended (I personally put more than one company on it intentionally > despite the disk latency because of the cost and operational simplicity) > > I’d bet most deployments of Cassandra are on disaggregated disks of some > kind (ebs, ceph, azure premium disks, etc). > > Most local nvme offerings are ephemeral in cloud environments and much > harder to deal with operationally.
