Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Jason Wee]

noted Tyler...and many thanks.. well, I read cassandra jira issues and just
followed one of the comment

https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5740
In general, I thought we always advised to upgrade through the 'major'
revs, 1.0 -> 1.1 -> 1.2. Or, at least, I think that's the advice now

but I will read carefully for the diff between 1.0.12 to latest of 1.1.x...
i think there should be many changes.

jason

On Wed, Mar 4, 2015 at 7:38 AM, Robert Coli  wrote:

> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Tyler Hobbs  wrote:
>
>> I'm not aware of any good reason to put 1.1.0 in the middle there.  I
>> would go straight from 1.0.12 to the latest 1.1.x.
>>
>
> +1
>
> =Rob
>

Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Robert Coli]

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Tyler Hobbs  wrote:

> I'm not aware of any good reason to put 1.1.0 in the middle there.  I
> would go straight from 1.0.12 to the latest 1.1.x.
>

+1

=Rob

Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Tyler Hobbs]

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Jason Wee  wrote:

> we are in the midst of upgrading... 1.0.8 -> 1.0.12 then to 1.1.0.. then
> to the latest of 1.1.. then to 1.2


I'm not aware of any good reason to put 1.1.0 in the middle there.  I would
go straight from 1.0.12 to the latest 1.1.x.


-- 
Tyler Hobbs
DataStax 

Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Jason Wee]

off topic for this discussion, and yea, we are in the midst of upgrading...
1.0.8 -> 1.0.12 then to 1.1.0.. then to the latest of 1.1.. then to 1.2.
keep my finger cross for safe upgrading for such a big cluster... we hope
that with cassandra moving some components off heap in 1.1 and 1.2, the
cluster would perform better, at least i do not need to do the user defined
compaction regulary.

thanks guys, jason

On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:59 AM,  wrote:

>  In my experience, you do not want to stay on 1.1 very long. 1.08 was
> very stable. 1.1 can get bad in a hurry. 1.2 (with many things moved
> off-heap) is very much better.
>
>
>
>
>
> Sean Durity – Cassandra Admin, Big Data Team
>
>
>
> *From:* Robert Coli [mailto:rc...@eventbrite.com]
> *Sent:* Monday, March 02, 2015 2:01 PM
> *To:* user@cassandra.apache.org
> *Subject:* Re: sstables remain after compaction
>
>
>
> On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Jason Wee  wrote:
>
> Hi Rob, sorry for the late response, festive season here. cassandra
> version is 1.0.8 and thank you, I will read on the READ_STAGE threads.
>
>
>
> 1.0.8 is pretty seriously old in 2015. I would upgrade to at least 1.2.x
> (via 1.1.x) ASAP. Your cluster will be much happier, in general.
>
>
>
> =Rob
>
>
>
> --
>
> The information in this Internet Email is confidential and may be legally
> privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this Email
> by anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any
> disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be
> taken in reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed
> to our clients any opinions or advice contained in this Email are subject
> to the terms and conditions expressed in any applicable governing The Home
> Depot terms of business or client engagement letter. The Home Depot
> disclaims all responsibility and liability for the accuracy and content of
> this attachment and for any damages or losses arising from any
> inaccuracies, errors, viruses, e.g., worms, trojan horses, etc., or other
> items of a destructive nature, which may be contained in this attachment
> and shall not be liable for direct, indirect, consequential or special
> damages in connection with this e-mail message or its attachment.
>

RE: sstables remain after compaction

[SEAN_R_DURITY]

In my experience, you do not want to stay on 1.1 very long. 1.08 was very 
stable. 1.1 can get bad in a hurry. 1.2 (with many things moved off-heap) is 
very much better.


Sean Durity – Cassandra Admin, Big Data Team

From: Robert Coli [mailto:rc...@eventbrite.com]
Sent: Monday, March 02, 2015 2:01 PM
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: sstables remain after compaction

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Jason Wee 
mailto:peich...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Rob, sorry for the late response, festive season here. cassandra version is 
1.0.8 and thank you, I will read on the READ_STAGE threads.

1.0.8 is pretty seriously old in 2015. I would upgrade to at least 1.2.x (via 
1.1.x) ASAP. Your cluster will be much happier, in general.

=Rob




The information in this Internet Email is confidential and may be legally 
privileged. It is intended solely for the addressee. Access to this Email by 
anyone else is unauthorized. If you are not the intended recipient, any 
disclosure, copying, distribution or any action taken or omitted to be taken in 
reliance on it, is prohibited and may be unlawful. When addressed to our 
clients any opinions or advice contained in this Email are subject to the terms 
and conditions expressed in any applicable governing The Home Depot terms of 
business or client engagement letter. The Home Depot disclaims all 
responsibility and liability for the accuracy and content of this attachment 
and for any damages or losses arising from any inaccuracies, errors, viruses, 
e.g., worms, trojan horses, etc., or other items of a destructive nature, which 
may be contained in this attachment and shall not be liable for direct, 
indirect, consequential or special damages in connection with this e-mail 
message or its attachment.

Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Robert Coli]

On Sat, Feb 28, 2015 at 5:39 PM, Jason Wee  wrote:

> Hi Rob, sorry for the late response, festive season here. cassandra
> version is 1.0.8 and thank you, I will read on the READ_STAGE threads.
>

1.0.8 is pretty seriously old in 2015. I would upgrade to at least 1.2.x
(via 1.1.x) ASAP. Your cluster will be much happier, in general.

=Rob

Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Jason Wee]

Hi Rob, sorry for the late response, festive season here. cassandra version
is 1.0.8 and thank you, I will read on the READ_STAGE threads.

Jason

On Wed, Feb 18, 2015 at 3:33 AM, Robert Coli  wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Jason Wee  wrote:
>
>> I trigger user defined compaction to big sstables (big as in the size per
>> sstable reach more than 50GB, some 100GB). Occasionally, after user defined
>> compaction, I see some sstables remain, even after 12 hours elapsed.
>>
>
> That is unexpected. What version of Cassandra?
>
>
>> You mentioned a thread, could you tell what threads are those or perhaps
>> highlight in the code?
>>
>
> I'd presume READ_STAGE threads.
>
> =Rob
>
>

Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Robert Coli]

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 7:45 PM, Jason Wee  wrote:

> I trigger user defined compaction to big sstables (big as in the size per
> sstable reach more than 50GB, some 100GB). Occasionally, after user defined
> compaction, I see some sstables remain, even after 12 hours elapsed.
>

That is unexpected. What version of Cassandra?


> You mentioned a thread, could you tell what threads are those or perhaps
> highlight in the code?
>

I'd presume READ_STAGE threads.

=Rob

Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Jason Wee]

Thank Rob,

I trigger user defined compaction to big sstables (big as in the size per
sstable reach more than 50GB, some 100GB). Occasionally, after user defined
compaction, I see some sstables remain, even after 12 hours elapsed.

You mentioned a thread, could you tell what threads are those or perhaps
highlight in the code?

Jason

On Sat, Feb 14, 2015 at 3:58 AM, Robert Coli  wrote:

> On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Jason Wee  wrote:
>
>> Pre cassandra 1.0, after sstables are compacted, the old sstables will be
>> remain until the first gc kick in. For cassandra 1.0, the sstables will be
>> remove after compaction is done. Will it be possible the old sstables
>> remains due to whatever reasons (e.g. read referencing)?
>>
>
> If I understand your question properly, the answer is "no" or "not for
> longer than the duration of a running thread."
>
> If compaction is working properly in a
> post-needs-the-java-GC-to-delete-files version of Cassandra the input files
> should be deleted ASAP. If a thread is actively accessing that file, I
> would imagine it blocks for that long, but that's not likely to be very
> long.
>
> =Rob
>
>

Re: sstables remain after compaction

[Robert Coli]

On Fri, Feb 13, 2015 at 1:35 AM, Jason Wee  wrote:

> Pre cassandra 1.0, after sstables are compacted, the old sstables will be
> remain until the first gc kick in. For cassandra 1.0, the sstables will be
> remove after compaction is done. Will it be possible the old sstables
> remains due to whatever reasons (e.g. read referencing)?
>

If I understand your question properly, the answer is "no" or "not for
longer than the duration of a running thread."

If compaction is working properly in a
post-needs-the-java-GC-to-delete-files version of Cassandra the input files
should be deleted ASAP. If a thread is actively accessing that file, I
would imagine it blocks for that long, but that's not likely to be very
long.

=Rob