Hi Peter
That was precisely it. Thank you :)
Doing a major compaction on the heaviest node (74.65GB) reduced it to 33.55GB.
I'll compact the other 2 nodes as well. I anticipate they will also settle
around that size.
On 2011-07-22, at 5:00 PM, Peter Tillotson wrote:
> I'm not sure if this
I'm not sure if this is the answer, but major compaction on each node
for each column family. I suspect the data shuffle has left quite a few
deleted keys which may get cleaned out on major compaction. As I
remember major compaction doesn't automatically in 7.x, I'm not sure if
it is triggered by r
I'm trying to balance Load ( 41.98GB vs 59.4GB vs 74.65GB )
Owns looks ok. They're all 33.33% which is what I want. It was calculated
simply by 2^127 / num_nodes. The only reason the first one doesn't start at 0
is that I''ve actually carved the ring planning for 9 machines (2 new data
cente
are you trying to balance "load" or "owns" ? "owns" looks fine ...
33.33% each ... which to me says balanced.
how did you calculate your tokens?
On Fri, Jul 22, 2011 at 4:37 PM, Mina Naguib
wrote:
>
> Address Status State Load Owns Token
> xx.xx.x.105 Up Normal
Hi everyone
I've been struggling trying to get the data volume ("load") to equalize across
a balanced cluster, and I'm not sure what else I can try.
Background: This was originally a 5-node cluster. We re-balanced the 3 faster
machines across the ring, and decommissioned the 2 older ones. We
