Yes, we do have RF=3. That explains it all. Thanks Peter!
Huy Peter Schuller wrote > >> What may be causing high IO wait on 2.new and 3.new? > > Do you have RF=3? > > The problem with 'nodetool ring' in terms of interpreting those '0%' > is that it does not take RF and replication strategy into account. If > you have RF=3, whatever data has its primary range assigned to node N > will also be on N+1 and N+2. Additionally, whatever data has it's > primary range assigned to N-1 and N-2 will also have a copy on N. > > So despite all the old nodes showing up as 0% in nodetool ring, they > are in fact responsible for data. And you would expect to see nodes > N+2 and N-2 be the two "old" nodes affected by decommissioning node N. > (Unless I'm tripping myself up somewhere now...) > > -- > / Peter Schuller (@scode, http://worldmodscode.wordpress.com) > -- View this message in context: http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Decommission-a-node-causing-high-IO-usage-on-2-other-nodes-tp7044866p7045589.html Sent from the cassandra-u...@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
