Hi, I noticed that you mentioned your goal is to optimize write throughput, and that you're using
Cassandra 3.11.2.Optimizing for write throughput is usually a proxy for optimizing for compaction, as
the cost of writes are very cheap but compacting to keep up with it can be pretty expensive.You'
G1GC would be the most suitable option and it has better control over
pauses and optimal.
Best Regards,
Kiran M K
On Wed, Nov 17, 2021, 10:27 PM Elliott Sims wrote:
> CMS has a higher risk of a long stop-the-world full GC that will cause a
> burst of timeouts, but if you're not getting that or
CMS has a higher risk of a long stop-the-world full GC that will cause a
burst of timeouts, but if you're not getting that or don't mind if it
happens now and then CMS is probably the way to go. It's generally
lower-overhead than G1. If you really don't care about latency it might
even be worth
Thank You
I'm going to achieve the most possible (write) throughput with Cassandra and
care less about latency, recommendations from community suggests that better to
use G1GC with 16GB heap, but when i already got 92% throughput with CMS, should
i consider changing it?
Sent using https://ww
Do you have any performance issues? such as long STW GC pauses or high
p99.9 latency? If not, then you shouldn't tune the GC for the sake of
it. However, if you do have performance issues related to GC, regardless
what is the GC metric you are looking at saying, you will need to
address the iss
Hi,
We are using Apache Cassandra 3.11.2 with its default gc configuration (CMS and
...) on a 16GB heap, i inspected gc logs using gcviewer and it reported 92% of
throughput, is that means not necessary to do any further tuning for gc? and
everything is ok with gc of Cassandra?
Sent using
