You are viewing a plain text version of this content. The canonical link for it is here.

Posted to commits@cassandra.apache.org by "Brandon Williams (JIRA)" <ji...@apache.org> on 2017/02/23 01:13:44 UTC

[jira] [Updated] (CASSANDRA-13258) Rethink read-time defragmentation introduced in 1.1 (CASSANDRA-2503)

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13258?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel ]

Brandon Williams updated CASSANDRA-13258:
-----------------------------------------
    Summary: Rethink read-time defragmentation introduced in 1.1 (CASSANDRA-2503)  (was: Rethink read-time defragmentation introduced in 1.0 (CASSANDRA-2503))

> Rethink read-time defragmentation introduced in 1.1 (CASSANDRA-2503)
> --------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-13258
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13258
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: Bug
>            Reporter: Nate McCall
>
> tl,dr; we issue a Mutation(!) on a read when using STCS and there are more than minCompactedThreshold SSTables encountered by the iterator. (See org/apache/cassandra/db/SinglePartitionReadCommand.java:782)
> I can see a couple of use cases where this *might* be useful, but from a practical stand point, this is an excellent way to exacerbate compaction falling behind.
> With the introduction of other, purpose built compaction strategies, I would be interested to hear why anyone would consider this still a good idea. Note that we only do it for STCS so at best, we are inconsistent. 
> There are some interesting comments on CASSANDRA-10342 regarding this as well.



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)