You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@cassandra.apache.org by mck <mc...@apache.org> on 2011/01/12 23:00:04 UTC
Should nodetool ring give equal load ?
I'm using 0.7.0-rc3, 3 nodes, RF=3, and ByteOrderedPartitioner.
When i run "nodetool ring" it reports
> Address Status State Load Owns Token
> Token(bytes[ff034355152567a5b2d962b55990e692])
> 152.90.242.91 Up Normal 12.26 GB 33.33% Token(bytes[01cecd88847283229a3dc88292deff86])
> 152.90.242.93 Up Normal 6.13 GB 33.33% Token(bytes[d4a4de25c0dad34749e99219e227d896])
> 152.90.242.92 Up Normal 6.13 GB 33.33% Token(bytes[ff034355152567a5b2d962b55990e692])
why would the first node have double the Load?
is this expected or is something wrong?
Number of files data_file_directories for the keyspace is roughly the same.
But each Index and Filter file is double the size on the first node (regardless of the cf they belong to).
"cleanup" didn't help. "compact" only took away 2GB. Otherwise there is a lot here i don't understand.
~mck
--
"The turtle only makes progress when it's neck is stuck out" Rollo May |
www.semb.wever.org | www.sesat.no | www.finn.no |
http://xss-http-filter.sf.net
Re: Should nodetool ring give equal load ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
On Wed, 2011-01-12 at 14:21 -0800, Ryan King wrote:
> What consistency level did you use to write the
> data?
R=1,W=1 (reads happen a long time afterwards).
~mck
--
"It is now quite lawful for a Catholic woman to avoid pregnancy by a
resort to mathematics, though she is still forbidden to resort to
physics and chemistry." H.L. Mencken | www.semb.wever.org | www.sesat.no
| www.finn.no | http://xss-http-filter.sf.net
Re: Should nodetool ring give equal load ?
Posted by Ryan King <ry...@twitter.com>.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 2:08 PM, mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
>> You're using an ordered partitioner and your nodes are evenly spread
>> around the ring, but your data probably isn't evenly distributed.
>
> This load number seems equals to `du -hs <data_file_directories>` and
> since i've got N == RF shouldn't the data size always be the same on
> every node?
Good point. I misread that as RF=2. I'm not sure what's going on here,
but it seems wrong. What consistency level did you use to write the
data?
-ryan
Re: Should nodetool ring give equal load ?
Posted by Brandon Williams <dr...@gmail.com>.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 4:08 PM, mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
>
> > You're using an ordered partitioner and your nodes are evenly spread
> > around the ring, but your data probably isn't evenly distributed.
>
> This load number seems equals to `du -hs <data_file_directories>` and
> since i've got N == RF shouldn't the data size always be the same on
> every node?
>
Maybe you have damaged replicas, try running repair everywhere.
-Brandon
Re: Should nodetool ring give equal load ?
Posted by mck <mc...@apache.org>.
> You're using an ordered partitioner and your nodes are evenly spread
> around the ring, but your data probably isn't evenly distributed.
This load number seems equals to `du -hs <data_file_directories>` and
since i've got N == RF shouldn't the data size always be the same on
every node?
~mck
--
"Traveller, there are no paths. Paths are made by walking." Australian
Aboriginal saying | www.semb.wever.org | www.sesat.no | www.finn.no |
http://xss-http-filter.sf.net
Re: Should nodetool ring give equal load ?
Posted by Ryan King <ry...@twitter.com>.
On Wed, Jan 12, 2011 at 2:00 PM, mck <mc...@apache.org> wrote:
> I'm using 0.7.0-rc3, 3 nodes, RF=3, and ByteOrderedPartitioner.
>
> When i run "nodetool ring" it reports
>
>> Address Status State Load Owns Token
>> Token(bytes[ff034355152567a5b2d962b55990e692])
>> 152.90.242.91 Up Normal 12.26 GB 33.33% Token(bytes[01cecd88847283229a3dc88292deff86])
>> 152.90.242.93 Up Normal 6.13 GB 33.33% Token(bytes[d4a4de25c0dad34749e99219e227d896])
>> 152.90.242.92 Up Normal 6.13 GB 33.33% Token(bytes[ff034355152567a5b2d962b55990e692])
>
> why would the first node have double the Load?
> is this expected or is something wrong?
>
> Number of files data_file_directories for the keyspace is roughly the same.
> But each Index and Filter file is double the size on the first node (regardless of the cf they belong to).
>
> "cleanup" didn't help. "compact" only took away 2GB. Otherwise there is a lot here i don't understand.
You're using an ordered partitioner and your nodes are evenly spread
around the ring, but your data probably isn't evenly distributed.
-ryan