Re: backing up and restoring from only 1 replica?
Hinted Handoff works well. But it's an optimisation that has certain safety valves, configuration and throttling that means it is still not considered the way to ensure on disk consistency. In general, if a node restarts or drops mutations HH should get the message there eventually. In specific cases it may not. Cheers - Aaron Morton Freelance Cassandra Developer New Zealand @aaronmorton http://www.thelastpickle.com On 4/03/2013, at 10:40 AM, Mike Koh defmike...@gmail.com wrote: Thanks for the response. Could you elaborate more on the bad things that happen during a restart or message drops that would cause a 1 replica restore to fail? I'm completely on board with not using a restore process that nobody else uses, but I need to convince somebody else who thinks that it will work that it is not a good idea. On 3/4/2013 7:54 AM, aaron morton wrote: That would be OK only if you never had node go down (e.g. a restart) or drop messages. It's not something I would consider trying. Cheers - Aaron Morton Freelance Cassandra Developer New Zealand @aaronmorton http://www.thelastpickle.com On 28/02/2013, at 3:21 PM, Mike Koh defmike...@gmail.com wrote: It has been suggested to me that we could save a fair amount of time and money by taking a snapshot of only 1 replica (so every third node for most column families). Assuming that we are okay with not having the absolute latest data, does this have any possibility of working? I feel like it shouldn't but don't really know the argument for why it wouldn't.
Re: backing up and restoring from only 1 replica?
That would be OK only if you never had node go down (e.g. a restart) or drop messages. It's not something I would consider trying. Cheers - Aaron Morton Freelance Cassandra Developer New Zealand @aaronmorton http://www.thelastpickle.com On 28/02/2013, at 3:21 PM, Mike Koh defmike...@gmail.com wrote: It has been suggested to me that we could save a fair amount of time and money by taking a snapshot of only 1 replica (so every third node for most column families). Assuming that we are okay with not having the absolute latest data, does this have any possibility of working? I feel like it shouldn't but don't really know the argument for why it wouldn't.
Re: backing up and restoring from only 1 replica?
Thanks for the response. Could you elaborate more on the bad things that happen during a restart or message drops that would cause a 1 replica restore to fail? I'm completely on board with not using a restore process that nobody else uses, but I need to convince somebody else who thinks that it will work that it is not a good idea. On 3/4/2013 7:54 AM, aaron morton wrote: That would be OK only if you never had node go down (e.g. a restart) or drop messages. It's not something I would consider trying. Cheers - Aaron Morton Freelance Cassandra Developer New Zealand @aaronmorton http://www.thelastpickle.com On 28/02/2013, at 3:21 PM, Mike Koh defmike...@gmail.com wrote: It has been suggested to me that we could save a fair amount of time and money by taking a snapshot of only 1 replica (so every third node for most column families). Assuming that we are okay with not having the absolute latest data, does this have any possibility of working? I feel like it shouldn't but don't really know the argument for why it wouldn't.
backing up and restoring from only 1 replica?
It has been suggested to me that we could save a fair amount of time and money by taking a snapshot of only 1 replica (so every third node for most column families). Assuming that we are okay with not having the absolute latest data, does this have any possibility of working? I feel like it shouldn't but don't really know the argument for why it wouldn't.
