Thanks,

Another related question. In the situation described below, where we have a row and a tombstone across more than one SSTable, and it would take a very long time for these SSTables to be compacted, are there two rows being tracked by bloomfilters (since there is a bloom filter per SSTable), or does Cassandra possibly do something more efficient?

To extend the example, if I delete a 1,000,000 rows, and that SSTable containing 1,000,000 tombstones is not compacted with the other SSTables containing those rows, are bloomfilters accounting for 2,000,000 rows, or 1,000,000?

This is more related to the current activities of deletion, as opposed to a major compaction (although the question is applicable to both). As we delete rows, will our bloomfilters grow?

-Mike

On 1/6/2013 3:49 PM, aaron morton wrote:
When these rows are deleted, tombstones will be created and stored in more 
recent sstables.  Upon compaction of sstables, and after gc_grace_period, I 
presume cassandra will have removed all traces of that row from disk.
Yes.
When using Size Tiered compaction (the default) tombstones are purged when all 
fragments of a row are included in a compaction. So if you have rows which are 
written to for A Very Long Time(™) it can take a while for everything to get 
purged.

In the normal case though it's not a concern.

However, after deleting such a large amount of information, there is no 
guarantee that Cassandra will compact these two tables together, causing the 
data to be deleted (right?).  Therefore, even after gc_grace_period, a large 
amount of space may still be used.
In the normal case this is not really an issue.

In your case things sound a little non normal. If you will have only a few 
hundred MB's, or a few GB's, of data level in the CF I would consider running a 
major compaction on it.

Major compaction will work on all SSTables and create one big SSTable, this 
will ensure all deleted data is deleted. We normally caution agains this as the 
one new file is often very big and will not get compacted for a while. However 
if you are deleting lots-o-data it may work. (There is also an anti compaction 
script around that may be of use.)

Another alternative is to compact some of the older sstables with newer ones 
via User Defined Compaction with JMX.


Is there a way, other than a major compaction, to clean up all this old data?  
I assume a nodetool scrub will cleanup old tombstones only if that row is not 
in another sstable?
I don't think scrub (or upgradesstables) remove tombstones.

Do tombstones take up bloomfilter space after gc_grace_period?
Any row, regardless of the liveness of the columns, takes up bloom filter space 
(in -Filter.db).
Once the row is removed it will no longer take up space.

Cheers

-----------------
Aaron Morton
Freelance Cassandra Developer
New Zealand

@aaronmorton
http://www.thelastpickle.com

On 6/01/2013, at 6:44 AM, Mike <mthero...@yahoo.com> wrote:

A couple more questions.

When these rows are deleted, tombstones will be created and stored in more 
recent sstables.  Upon compaction of sstables, and after gc_grace_period, I 
presume cassandra will have removed all traces of that row from disk.

However, after deleting such a large amount of information, there is no 
guarantee that Cassandra will compact these two tables together, causing the 
data to be deleted (right?).  Therefore, even after gc_grace_period, a large 
amount of space may still be used.

Is there a way, other than a major compaction, to clean up all this old data?  
I assume a nodetool scrub will cleanup old tombstones only if that row is not 
in another sstable?

Do tombstones take up bloomfilter space after gc_grace_period?

-Mike

On 1/2/2013 6:41 PM, aaron morton wrote:
1) As one can imagine, the index and bloom filter for this column family is 
large.  Am I correct to assume that bloom filter and index space will not be 
reduced until after gc_grace_period?
Yes.

2) If I would manually run repair across a cluster, is there a process I can 
use to safely remove these tombstones before gc_grace period to free this 
memory sooner?
There is nothing to specifically purge tombstones.

You can temporarily reduce the gc_grace_seconds and then trigger compaction. 
Either by reducing the min_compaction_threshold to 2 and doing a flush. Or by 
kicking of a user defined compaction using the JMX interface.

3) Any words of warning when undergoing this?
Make sure you have a good breakfast.
(It's more general advice than Cassandra specific.)


Cheers

-----------------
Aaron Morton
Freelance Cassandra Developer
New Zealand

@aaronmorton
http://www.thelastpickle.com

On 30/12/2012, at 8:51 AM, Mike <mthero...@yahoo.com> wrote:

Hello,

We are undergoing a change to our internal datamodel that will result in the 
eventual deletion of over a hundred million rows from a Cassandra column 
family.  From what I understand, this will result in the generation of 
tombstones, which will be cleaned up during compaction, after gc_grace_period 
time (default: 10 days).

A couple of questions:

1) As one can imagine, the index and bloom filter for this column family is 
large.  Am I correct to assume that bloom filter and index space will not be 
reduced until after gc_grace_period?

2) If I would manually run repair across a cluster, is there a process I can 
use to safely remove these tombstones before gc_grace period to free this 
memory sooner?

3) Any words of warning when undergoing this?

We are running Cassandra 1.1.2 on a 6 node cluster and a Replication Factor of 
3.  We use LOCAL_QUORM consistency for all operations.

Thanks!
-Mike

Reply via email to