Hi Kiran
I think you are right. 3.x does not have such an option in cassandra.yaml!
Thanks!
Shaurya
On Sat, Nov 13, 2021 at 8:42 AM Kiran mk wrote:
> Hi Andy,
>
> Internode encryption is not possible without downtime prior to Apache
> Cassandra 4.0.As there is no optional option before 4.0
Hi Andy,
Internode encryption is not possible without downtime prior to Apache
Cassandra 4.0.As there is no optional option before 4.0 under
server_encryption_options, If you try to enable it, cassandra running
on version 3.x wouldn't start as the property isnt available.
optional is only avai
Oh sorry - a cluster per application makes sense. Sharding within an
application makes sense to avoid very very very large clusters (think:
~thousand nodes). 1 cluster per app/use case.
On Fri, Nov 12, 2021 at 1:39 PM S G wrote:
> Thanks Jeff.
> Any side-effect on the client config from small cl
Thanks Jeff.
Any side-effect on the client config from small clusters perspective?
Like several smaller clusters means more CassandraClient objects on the
client side but I guess number of connections shall remain the same as
number of physical nodes will most likely remain the same only. So I thi
Most people are better served building multiple clusters and spending their
engineering time optimizing for maintaining multiple clusters, vs spending
their engineering time learning how to work around the sharp edges that
make large shared clusters hard.
Large multi-tenant clusters give you less
Hello,
Is there any case where we would prefer one big giant cluster (with
multiple large tables) over several smaller clusters?
Apart from some management overhead of multiple Cassandra Clients, it seems
several smaller clusters are always better than a big one:
1. Avoids SPOF for all tables
Thanks Andy! It was very helpful.
On Wed, Nov 10, 2021 at 12:04 PM Tolbert, Andy wrote:
> Hi Shaurya,
>
> On Tue, Nov 9, 2021 at 11:57 PM Shaurya Gupta
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We want to enable node-to-node SSL on a live cluster. Could it be done
>> without any down time ?
>>
>
> Yup, this is d
