You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.
Posted to user@cassandra.apache.org by blafrisch <mi...@swype.com> on 2011/12/09 15:54:14 UTC

Question about storage (live vs total) for column families

My understanding was that total is sum of all SSTables on disc even those not
being used currently and live is the sum of the SSTables on disc that are
being used currently.

Well I have a Cassandra 1.0.2 cluster in which all of the column families
are reporting live being greater than total.  I have a 5 node cluster with a
replication factor of 3.

And example column family's data:
                SSTable count: 7
                Space used (live): 360190517439
                Space used (total): 114886096957

As you can see, live is a little over 3x that of the total.  How is that
possible?  The actual disk space consumed reflects that of the of the total,
not "live".

--
View this message in context: http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Question-about-storage-live-vs-total-for-column-families-tp7078451p7078451.html
Sent from the cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at Nabble.com.

Re: Question about storage (live vs total) for column families

Posted by Edward Capriolo <ed...@gmail.com>.
That version of Cassandra had a bug where it was using the wrong size
especially if someone is using compressed tables.

On Fri, Dec 9, 2011 at 9:54 AM, blafrisch <mi...@swype.com> wrote:

> My understanding was that total is sum of all SSTables on disc even those
> not
> being used currently and live is the sum of the SSTables on disc that are
> being used currently.
>
> Well I have a Cassandra 1.0.2 cluster in which all of the column families
> are reporting live being greater than total.  I have a 5 node cluster with
> a
> replication factor of 3.
>
> And example column family's data:
>                SSTable count: 7
>                Space used (live): 360190517439
>                Space used (total): 114886096957
>
> As you can see, live is a little over 3x that of the total.  How is that
> possible?  The actual disk space consumed reflects that of the of the
> total,
> not "live".
>
> --
> View this message in context:
> http://cassandra-user-incubator-apache-org.3065146.n2.nabble.com/Question-about-storage-live-vs-total-for-column-families-tp7078451p7078451.html
> Sent from the cassandra-user@incubator.apache.org mailing list archive at
> Nabble.com.
>