I would guess more aggressive compaction settings, did you update rows or
insert some twice?
If you run major compaction a couple times on the 0.8.1 cluster does the data
size get smaller?
You can use the "describe" command to check if compression got turned on.
-Jeremiah
________________________________
From: Ravikumar Govindarajan [ravikumar.govindara...@gmail.com]
Sent: Thursday, March 15, 2012 4:41 AM
To: user@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: 0.8.1 Vs 1.0.7
Hi,
I ran some data import tests for cassandra 0.8.1 and 1.0.7. The results were a
little bit surprising
0.8.1, SimpleStrategy, Rep_Factor=3,QUORUM Writes, RP, SimpleSnitch
XXX.XXX.XXX.A datacenter1 rack1 Up Normal 140.61 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.B datacenter1 rack1 Up Normal 139.92 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.C datacenter1 rack1 Up Normal 138.81 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.D datacenter1 rack1 Up Normal 139.78 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.E datacenter1 rack1 Up Normal 137.44 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.F datacenter1 rack1 Up Normal 138.48 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.G datacenter1 rack1 Up Normal 140.52 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.H datacenter1 rack1 Up Normal 145.24 GB 12.50%
1.0.7, NTS, Rep_Factor{DC1:3, DC2:2}, LOCAL_QUORUM writes, RP [DC2 m/c yet to
join ring],
PropertyFileSnitch
XXX.XXX.XXX.A DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 48.72 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.B DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 51.23 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.C DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 52.4 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.D DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 49.64 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.E DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 48.5 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.F DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 53.38 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.G DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 51.11 GB 12.50%
XXX.XXX.XXX.H DC1 RAC1 Up Normal 53.36 GB 12.50%
There seems to be 3X savings in size for the same dataset running 1.0.7. I have
not enabled compression for any of the CFs. Will it be enabled by default when
creating a new CF in 1.0.7? cassandra.yaml is also mostly identical.
Thanks and Regards,
Ravi
