issue you are referring to. It is fixed in trunk.
> And any problems with small memory boxes? I see some chatter on the
> cassandra development list about OOM errors. Are they more prevalent
> on smaller footprint boxes?
>
> Thanks again,
>
> -Anthony
>
> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:33:21AM -0500, Jonathan Ellis wrote:
>> IMO the biggest downside to running on EC2 is that IO is terrible. I
>> haven't done benchmarks, but anecdotally disk performance in
>> particular seems like an order of magnitude slower than you'd get on
>> non-virtual disks. So that is worth investigating before assuming
>> that the price/performance on EC2 is what you think it is.
>>
>> Other than that, Cassandra is designed to emphasize availability so it
>> should work fine in the situations you describe. Hinted handoff in
>> particular will get writes to the right nodes quickly when machines
>> come back online. (However, Cassandra is not yet good at dealing with
>> machines becoming permanently dead.)
>>
>> Of course if _all_ of some keys' replicas are temporarily partitioned
>> off from you you won't be able to read that data until they are
>> visible again.
>>
>> -Jonathan
>>
>> On Sat, Jun 13, 2009 at 11:20 AM, Anthony
>> Molinaro<
[hidden email]> wrote:
>> > Hi,
>> >
>> > I was wondering what the viability of running cassandra on ec2 was.
>> > I believe that it currently runs on some pretty hefty hardware at
>> > facebook, so I'm wondering what the minimum hardware config is
>> > (in other words can I run it on a cluster of 2core 4GB machines)?
>> > Also, running on Amazon means no multicast, network partitions and
>> > machines just disappearing. How does cassandra deal with these
>> > constraints/failures?
>> >
>> > Thanks for information,
>> >
>> > -Anthony
>> >
>> > --
>> > ------------------------------------------------------------------------
>> > Anthony Molinaro <
[hidden email]>
>> >
>
> --
> ------------------------------------------------------------------------
> Anthony Molinaro <
[hidden email]>
>
Locked
