Cassandra + ElasticSearch

James Strachan james.strachan at gmail.com
Fri Mar 14 18:22:45 UTC 2014


Agreed. I guess it depends on how much IO / CPU is involved.

At least having the option to try on the same box; or close to them would
be good. I wonder how bad performance is if the ES node is remote?


On 14 March 2014 18:18, Alan Santos <asantos at redhat.com> wrote:

>
> I would also be interested in seeing this, but co-locating the two implies
> similar scale out strategy and/or workload - it's not clear that's the
> case.
>
> but yes, from a provisioning pov it does simplify things.
>
> -alan
>
>
> On Mar 14, 2014, at 2:09 PM, James Strachan <james.strachan at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
> Hi Elias
>
> co-locating ElasticSearch on the same boxes as Cassandra sounds awesome!
> Any chance you could post the Cassandra piece? I'd love to try it; as it'd
> make provisioning RHQ much simpler with just Cassandra and ES talking to
> it; then if feels like there's just a single database to manage.
>
> --
> James
> -------
> Red Hat
>
> Email: jstracha at redhat.com
> Web: http://fusesource.com
> Twitter: jstrachan, fusenews
> Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/
>
> Open Source Integration
> _______________________________________________
> rhq-devel mailing list
> rhq-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-devel
>
>
>
> _______________________________________________
> rhq-devel mailing list
> rhq-devel at lists.fedorahosted.org
> https://lists.fedorahosted.org/mailman/listinfo/rhq-devel
>
>


-- 
James
-------
Red Hat

Email: jstracha at redhat.com
Web: http://fusesource.com
Twitter: jstrachan, fusenews
Blog: http://macstrac.blogspot.com/

Open Source Integration
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <https://lists.fedorahosted.org/pipermail/rhq-devel/attachments/20140314/5d1941f9/attachment.html>


More information about the rhq-devel mailing list