http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_children_of_Priam
You've got plenty of children of Priam to go around. Doesn't anyone read the
Iliad any more? :)
--DRS
On Oct 11, 2013, at 6:55 AM, Edward Capriolo edlinuxg...@gmail.com wrote:
Stick sandra on the end. Restsandra.
On Friday, October
ocean's good reputation in the community.
On Sun, Aug 4, 2013 at 12:53 AM, David Schairer dschai...@humbaba.net wrote:
I've run several lab configurations on linodes; I wouldn't run cassandra on
any shared virtual platform for large-scale production, just because your IO
performance
I've run several lab configurations on linodes; I wouldn't run cassandra on any
shared virtual platform for large-scale production, just because your IO
performance is going to be really hard to predict. Lots of people do, though
-- depends on your cassandra loads and how consistent you need
Who breaks a butterfly upon a wheel?
It will work, but you'd have a distributed database running on a single point
of failure storage fabric, thus destroying much of your benefits, unless you
have enough discrete SAN units that you treat them as racks in your cassandra
topology to ensure that
Well, not really. Astyanax ('astu-wanax' in mycenaean greek, 'lord of the
city') has his brains dashed out against the walls of troy by Neoptolemus, son
of Achilles. So the suck was universal.
--DRS, possibly the only trained classicist using big cassandra databases :)
On Nov 28, 2012, at
We built multi-DC right from the start -- two equal locations about 1000 miles
apart but on the same provider backbone so there was reasonably robust and
consistent connectivity between them. We did this using software ipsec to set
up tunnels between the private networks in each location, but
There was a thread on this a couple days ago -- short answer, the 'owns %'
column is effectively incorrect when you're using multiple DCs. If you had all
3 servers in 1 DC, since server YYY has token 1 and server XXX has token 0,
then server XXX would truly 'own' 0% (actually, 1/(2^128) :) ),
nodetool ring is, IMHO, quite confusing in the case of multiple datacenters.
Might be easier to think of it as two rings:
in your DC1 ring you have two nodes, and since the tokens are balanced,
assuming your rows are randomly distributed you'll have half the data on each,
since your
