noted Tyler...and many thanks.. well, I read cassandra jira issues and just
followed one of the comment
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-5740
In general, I thought we always advised to upgrade through the 'major'
revs, 1.0 -> 1.1 -> 1.2. Or, at least, I think that's the advice now
This is a tough one. One thing I can think of is to use Spark/Spark SQL to
run ad-hoc queries on C* cluster. You can post on "Spark Cassandra
Connector" user group.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 10:18 AM, Yulian Oifa wrote:
> Hello
> Initially problem is that customer wants to have an option for ANY qu
Some times My C* 2.1.3 cluster compaction or streaming occur this error ,do
this because of disk or filesystem problem??
Thanks All.
--
Ranger Tsao
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:34 PM, Tyler Hobbs wrote:
> I'm not aware of any good reason to put 1.1.0 in the middle there. I
> would go straight from 1.0.12 to the latest 1.1.x.
>
+1
=Rob
I agree with jonathan haddad. A traditional ACID transaction following the
classic definition, isolation is necessary. Having said that, there is
different levels of isolation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolation_%28database_systems%29#Isolation_levels
Saying the distinction is pendantic is wr
This is often a confusing topic because someone came up with the term ACID,
which lists isolation as well as atomicity, and as a result most people
assume they are independent. This is incorrect. For something to be
atomic, it actually requires isolation.
"An operation is atomic if no intermedia
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 3:44 AM, Jason Wee wrote:
> we are in the midst of upgrading... 1.0.8 -> 1.0.12 then to 1.1.0.. then
> to the latest of 1.1.. then to 1.2
I'm not aware of any good reason to put 1.1.0 in the middle there. I would
go straight from 1.0.12 to the latest 1.1.x.
--
Tyler H
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Jonathan Haddad wrote:
> Actually, that's not true either. It's technically possible for a batch
> to be partially applied in the current implementation, even with logged
> batches. "atomic" is used incorrectly here, imo, since more than 2 states
> can be visible
I would recommend against 2.0.12 as long as nodetool cleanup is broken and
wait for 2.0.13.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 11:43 AM, Nate McCall wrote:
> Did you run 'upgrade sstables'? See these two sections in 2.0's NEWS.txt:
> https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-2.0/NEWS.txt#L132-L141
Actually, that's not true either. It's technically possible for a batch to
be partially applied in the current implementation, even with logged
batches. "atomic" is used incorrectly here, imo, since more than 2 states
can be visible, unapplied & applied.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:26 AM Michael Dy
Did you run 'upgrade sstables'? See these two sections in 2.0's NEWS.txt:
https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-2.0/NEWS.txt#L132-L141
https://github.com/apache/cassandra/blob/cassandra-2.0/NEWS.txt#L195-L198
It's a good idea to move up to 2.0.12 while your at it. There have been a
nu
If you're able to configure your clients so that they don't send requests
to 1 node in the cluster you can enable PasswordAuthenticator &
CassandraAuthorizer on that node only and use cqlsh to setup all your users
& permissions. The rest of the cluster will continue to serve client
requests as norm
Hi,
we have a 52 Cassandra nodes cluster running Apache Cassandra 1.2.13.
As we are planning to migrate to Cassandra 2.0.10, we decide to do
some tests and we noticed that once a node in the cluster have been
upgraded to Cassandra 2.0.x, restarting a Cassandra 1.2.x will fail.
The tests were done
Per Aleksey Yeschenko's comment on that ticket, it does seem like a
timestamp granularity issue, but it should work properly if it is within
the same session. gocql by default uses 2 connections and 128 streams per
connection. If you set it to 1 connection with 1 stream this problem goes
away. I su
I have a minor complaint about the documentation. On the page for Batch
Statements:
http://www.datastax.com/documentation/cql/3.0/cql/cql_reference/batch_r.html
It states: "In the context of a Cassandra batch operation, atomic means
that if any of the batch succeeds, all of it will."
While the
> Here "partition" is a random digit from 0 to (N*M)
> where N=nodes in cluster, and M=arbitrary number.
Hopefully it was obvious, but here (unless you've got hot partitions),
you don't need N.
~mck
Hello
Initially problem is that customer wants to have an option for ANY query ,
which does not fits good with NOSQL.However the size of data is too big for
Relational DB.
There are no typical queries on the data, there are 10 fields , based on
which ( any mix of them also ) queries should be made.
Hello
You can use timeuuid as raw key and create sepate CF to be used for indexing
Indexing CF may be either with user_id as key , or a better approach is to
partition row by timestamp.
In case of partition you can create compound key , in which you will store
user_id and timestamp base ( for examp
These questions would be better addressed to the Spark Cassandra Connector
mailing list, which can be found here:
https://github.com/datastax/spark-cassandra-connector/#community
Thanks,
Carl
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 4:42 AM, Pavel Velikhov
wrote:
> Hi, is there a paper or a document where one ca
Clint,
> CREATE TABLE events (
> id text,
> date text, // Could also use year+month here or year+week or something else
> event_time timestamp,
> event blob,
> PRIMARY KEY ((id, date), event_time))
> WITH CLUSTERING ORDER BY (event_time DESC);
>
> The downside of this approach is that w
I'd recommend using 100K and 10M as rough guidelines for the maximum number
of rows and bytes in a single partition. Sure, Cassandra can technically
handle a lot more than that, but very large partitions can make your life
more difficult. Of course you will have to do a POC to validate the sweet
sp
Hi,
I have not done something similar, however I have some comments:
On Mon, Mar 2, 2015 at 8:47 PM, Clint Kelly wrote:
> The downside of this approach is that we can no longer do a simple
> continuous scan to get all of the events for a given user.
>
Sure, but would you really do that real ti
Hi,
I found something strange this morning on our secondary cluster. I
upgraded to 2.1.3 - hoping for incremental repairs to work - recently
and this morning OpsCenter showed me disk usages to be very unequal.
Most irritating is that some nodes show data sizes of > 3TB on one node,
but they h
off topic for this discussion, and yea, we are in the midst of upgrading...
1.0.8 -> 1.0.12 then to 1.1.0.. then to the latest of 1.1.. then to 1.2.
keep my finger cross for safe upgrading for such a big cluster... we hope
that with cassandra moving some components off heap in 1.1 and 1.2, the
clus
Hi, is there a paper or a document where one can read how Spark reads Cassandra
data in parallel? And how it writes data back from RDDs? Its a bit hard to have
a clear picture in mind.
Thank you,
Pavel Velikhov
> On Mar 3, 2015, at 1:08 AM, Rumph, Frens Jan wrote:
>
> Hi all,
>
> I didn't fi
Does DateTieredCompactionStrategy in Apache Cassandra 2.1.2. work with a
compound clustering key?
More specifically would it work for a table like this where (timestamp,
hash) makes up a compound clustering key:
CREATE TABLE sensordata (
timeblock int,
timestamp timestamp,
hash int,
26 matches
Mail list logo
