Re: CASSANDRA-13241 lower default chunk_length_in_kb

2018-10-11 Thread Jeff Jirsa
I think 16k is a better default, but it should only affect new tables. Whoever changes it, please make sure you think about the upgrade path. > On Oct 12, 2018, at 2:31 AM, Ben Bromhead wrote: > > This is something that's bugged me for ages, tbh the performance gain for > most use cases

Re: CASSANDRA-13241 lower default chunk_length_in_kb

2018-10-11 Thread Pavel Yaskevich
On Thu, Oct 11, 2018 at 4:31 PM Ben Bromhead wrote: > This is something that's bugged me for ages, tbh the performance gain for > most use cases far outweighs the increase in memory usage and I would even > be in favor of changing the default now, optimizing the storage cost later > (if it's

cluster launching tool for dev work

2018-10-11 Thread Jonathan Haddad
Recently I reached an inflection point where my annoyance of launching clusters finally overcame my laziness. I wanted something similar to CCM, so I wrote it. The tool was designed for our usage at TLP, which usually means quickly firing up clusters for running tests. It started out as some

Re: CASSANDRA-13241 lower default chunk_length_in_kb

2018-10-11 Thread Ben Bromhead
This is something that's bugged me for ages, tbh the performance gain for most use cases far outweighs the increase in memory usage and I would even be in favor of changing the default now, optimizing the storage cost later (if it's found to be worth it). For some anecdotal evidence: 4kb is

CASSANDRA-13241 lower default chunk_length_in_kb

2018-10-11 Thread Ariel Weisberg
Hi, This is regarding https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13241 This ticket has languished for a while. IMO it's too late in 4.0 to implement a more memory efficient representation for compressed chunk offsets. However I don't think we should put out another release with the