From 100s to 100s of Millions

From 100s to 100s ofMillionsJuly 2011Erik Onnen

About Me• Director of Platform Engineering at Urban Airship (.75 years)• Previously Principal Engineer at Jive Software (3 years)• 12 years large scale, distributed systems experience going back to CORBA• Cassandra, HBase, Kafka and ZooKeeper contributor - most recently CASSANDRA-2463

In this Talk• About Urban Airship• Systems Overview• A Tale of Storage Engines• Our Cassandra Deployment• Battle Scars • Development Lessons Learned • Operations Lessons Learned• Looking Forward

What is an Urban Airship?• Hosting for mobile services that developers should not build themselves• Unified API for services across platforms• SLAs for throughput, latency

By The Numbers

By The Numbers• Over 160 million active application installs use our system across over 80 million unique devices

By The Numbers• Over 160 million active application installs use our system across over 80 million unique devices• Freemium API peaks at 700 requests/second, dedicated customer API 10K requests/second

By The Numbers• Over 160 million active application installs use our system across over 80 million unique devices• Freemium API peaks at 700 requests/second, dedicated customer API 10K requests/second • Over half of those are device check-ins

By The Numbers• Over 160 million active application installs use our system across over 80 million unique devices• Freemium API peaks at 700 requests/second, dedicated customer API 10K requests/second • Over half of those are device check-ins • Transactions - send push, check status, get content

By The Numbers• Over 160 million active application installs use our system across over 80 million unique devices• Freemium API peaks at 700 requests/second, dedicated customer API 10K requests/second • Over half of those are device check-ins • Transactions - send push, check status, get content• At any given point in time, we have ~ 1.1 million secure socket connections into our transactional core

By The Numbers• Over 160 million active application installs use our system across over 80 million unique devices• Freemium API peaks at 700 requests/second, dedicated customer API 10K requests/second • Over half of those are device check-ins • Transactions - send push, check status, get content• At any given point in time, we have ~ 1.1 million secure socket connections into our transactional core• 6 months for the company to deliver 1M messages, just broke 4.2B

Transactional System

Transactional System• Edge Systems: • API - Apache/Python/django+piston+pycassa • Device negotiation - Java NIO + Hector • Message Delivery - Python, Java NIO + Hector • Device data - Java HTTPS endpoint

Transactional System• Edge Systems: • API - Apache/Python/django+piston+pycassa • Device negotiation - Java NIO + Hector • Message Delivery - Python, Java NIO + Hector • Device data - Java HTTPS endpoint• Persistence • Sharded PostgreSQL • Cassandra 0.7 • MongoDB 1.7

A Tale of Storage Engines

A Tale of Storage Engines• “Is there a NoSQL system you guys don’t use?”

A Tale of Storage Engines• “Is there a NoSQL system you guys don’t use?” • Riak :)

A Tale of Storage Engines• “Is there a NoSQL system you guys don’t use?” • Riak :)• We do use:

A Tale of Storage Engines• “Is there a NoSQL system you guys don’t use?” • Riak :)• We do use: • Cassandra

A Tale of Storage Engines• “Is there a NoSQL system you guys don’t use?” • Riak :)• We do use: • Cassandra • HBase

A Tale of Storage Engines• “Is there a NoSQL system you guys don’t use?” • Riak :)• We do use: • Cassandra • HBase • Redis

A Tale of Storage Engines• “Is there a NoSQL system you guys don’t use?” • Riak :)• We do use: • Cassandra • HBase • Redis • MongoDB

A Tale of Storage Engines• “Is there a NoSQL system you guys don’t use?” • Riak :)• We do use: • Cassandra • HBase • Redis • MongoDB• We’re converging on Cassandra + PostgreSQL for transactional and HBase for long haul

A Tale of Storage Engines• PostgreSQL

A Tale of Storage Engines• PostgreSQL • Bootstrapped the company on PostgreSQL in EC2

A Tale of Storage Engines• PostgreSQL • Bootstrapped the company on PostgreSQL in EC2 • Highly relational, large index model

A Tale of Storage Engines• PostgreSQL • Bootstrapped the company on PostgreSQL in EC2 • Highly relational, large index model • Layered in memcached

A Tale of Storage Engines• PostgreSQL • Bootstrapped the company on PostgreSQL in EC2 • Highly relational, large index model • Layered in memcached • Writes weren’t scaling after ~ 6 months

A Tale of Storage Engines• PostgreSQL • Bootstrapped the company on PostgreSQL in EC2 • Highly relational, large index model • Layered in memcached • Writes weren’t scaling after ~ 6 months • Continued to use for several silos of data but needed a way to grow more easily

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB • Initially, we loved Mongo

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB • Initially, we loved Mongo • Document databases are cool

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB • Initially, we loved Mongo • Document databases are cool • BSON is nice

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB • Initially, we loved Mongo • Document databases are cool • BSON is nice • As data set grew, we learned a lot about MongoDB

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB • Initially, we loved Mongo • Document databases are cool • BSON is nice • As data set grew, we learned a lot about MongoDB • “MongoDB does not wait for a response by default when writing to the database.”

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Read/Write Problems

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Read/Write Problems • Early days (1.2) one global lock (reads block writes and vice versa)

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Read/Write Problems • Early days (1.2) one global lock (reads block writes and vice versa) • Later, one read lock, one write lock per server

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Read/Write Problems • Early days (1.2) one global lock (reads block writes and vice versa) • Later, one read lock, one write lock per server • Long running queries were often devastating

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Read/Write Problems • Early days (1.2) one global lock (reads block writes and vice versa) • Later, one read lock, one write lock per server • Long running queries were often devastating • Replication would fall too far behind and stop

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Read/Write Problems • Early days (1.2) one global lock (reads block writes and vice versa) • Later, one read lock, one write lock per server • Long running queries were often devastating • Replication would fall too far behind and stop • No writes or updates

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Read/Write Problems • Early days (1.2) one global lock (reads block writes and vice versa) • Later, one read lock, one write lock per server • Long running queries were often devastating • Replication would fall too far behind and stop • No writes or updates • Effectively a failure for most clients

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Read/Write Problems • Early days (1.2) one global lock (reads block writes and vice versa) • Later, one read lock, one write lock per server • Long running queries were often devastating • Replication would fall too far behind and stop • No writes or updates • Effectively a failure for most clients • With replication, queries for anything other than the shard key talk to every node in the cluster

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Update Problems

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Update Problems • Simple updates (i.e. counters) were fine

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Update Problems • Simple updates (i.e. counters) were fine • Bigger updates commonly resulted in large scans of the collection depending on position == heavy disk I/O

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Update Problems • Simple updates (i.e. counters) were fine • Bigger updates commonly resulted in large scans of the collection depending on position == heavy disk I/O • Frequently spill to end of the collection datafile leaving “holes” but not sparse files

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Update Problems • Simple updates (i.e. counters) were fine • Bigger updates commonly resulted in large scans of the collection depending on position == heavy disk I/O • Frequently spill to end of the collection datafile leaving “holes” but not sparse files • Those “holes” get MMap’d even though they’re not used

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Update Problems • Simple updates (i.e. counters) were fine • Bigger updates commonly resulted in large scans of the collection depending on position == heavy disk I/O • Frequently spill to end of the collection datafile leaving “holes” but not sparse files • Those “holes” get MMap’d even though they’re not used • Updates moving data acquire multiple locks commonly blocking other read/write operations

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Optimization Problems

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Optimization Problems • Compacting a collection locks the entire collection

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Optimization Problems • Compacting a collection locks the entire collection • Read slave was too busy to be a backup, needed moar RAMs but were already on High-Memory EC2, nowhere else to go

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Optimization Problems • Compacting a collection locks the entire collection • Read slave was too busy to be a backup, needed moar RAMs but were already on High-Memory EC2, nowhere else to go • Mongo MMaps everything - when your data set is bigger than RAM, you better have fast disks

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Optimization Problems • Compacting a collection locks the entire collection • Read slave was too busy to be a backup, needed moar RAMs but were already on High-Memory EC2, nowhere else to go • Mongo MMaps everything - when your data set is bigger than RAM, you better have fast disks • Until 1.8, no support for sparse indexes

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Ops Issues

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Ops Issues • Lots of good information in mongostat

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Ops Issues • Lots of good information in mongostat • Recovering a crashed system was effectively impossible without disabling indexes first (not the default)

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Ops Issues • Lots of good information in mongostat • Recovering a crashed system was effectively impossible without disabling indexes first (not the default) • Replica sets never worked for us in testing, lots of inconsistencies in failure scenarios

A Tale of Storage Engines• MongoDB - Ops Issues • Lots of good information in mongostat • Recovering a crashed system was effectively impossible without disabling indexes first (not the default) • Replica sets never worked for us in testing, lots of inconsistencies in failure scenarios • Scattered records lead to lots of I/O that hurt on bad disks (EC2)

Cassandra at Urban Airship

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Summer of 2010 - no faith left in MongoDB started a migration to Cassandra

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Summer of 2010 - no faith left in MongoDB started a migration to Cassandra• Lots of L&P testing, client analysis, etc.

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Summer of 2010 - no faith left in MongoDB started a migration to Cassandra• Lots of L&P testing, client analysis, etc.• December 2010 - Cassandra backed 85% of our Android stack’s persistence

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Summer of 2010 - no faith left in MongoDB started a migration to Cassandra• Lots of L&P testing, client analysis, etc.• December 2010 - Cassandra backed 85% of our Android stack’s persistence • Six EC2 XLS with each serving:

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Summer of 2010 - no faith left in MongoDB started a migration to Cassandra• Lots of L&P testing, client analysis, etc.• December 2010 - Cassandra backed 85% of our Android stack’s persistence • Six EC2 XLS with each serving: • 30GB data

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Summer of 2010 - no faith left in MongoDB started a migration to Cassandra• Lots of L&P testing, client analysis, etc.• December 2010 - Cassandra backed 85% of our Android stack’s persistence • Six EC2 XLS with each serving: • 30GB data • ~1000 reads/second/node

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Summer of 2010 - no faith left in MongoDB started a migration to Cassandra• Lots of L&P testing, client analysis, etc.• December 2010 - Cassandra backed 85% of our Android stack’s persistence • Six EC2 XLS with each serving: • 30GB data • ~1000 reads/second/node • ~750 writes/second/node

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra?

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra? • Well suited for most of our data model (simple DAGs)

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra? • Well suited for most of our data model (simple DAGs) • Lots of UUIDs and hashes partition well

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra? • Well suited for most of our data model (simple DAGs) • Lots of UUIDs and hashes partition well • Retrievals don’t need ordering beyond keys or TSD

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra? • Well suited for most of our data model (simple DAGs) • Lots of UUIDs and hashes partition well • Retrievals don’t need ordering beyond keys or TSD • Rolling upgrades FTW

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra? • Well suited for most of our data model (simple DAGs) • Lots of UUIDs and hashes partition well • Retrievals don’t need ordering beyond keys or TSD • Rolling upgrades FTW • Dynamic rebalancing and node addition

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra? • Well suited for most of our data model (simple DAGs) • Lots of UUIDs and hashes partition well • Retrievals don’t need ordering beyond keys or TSD • Rolling upgrades FTW • Dynamic rebalancing and node addition • Column TTLs huge for us

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra? • Well suited for most of our data model (simple DAGs) • Lots of UUIDs and hashes partition well • Retrievals don’t need ordering beyond keys or TSD • Rolling upgrades FTW • Dynamic rebalancing and node addition • Column TTLs huge for us • Awesome community :)

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra cont’d?

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra cont’d? • Particularly well suited to working around EC2 availability

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra cont’d? • Particularly well suited to working around EC2 availability • Needed a cross AZ strategy - we had seen EBS issues in the past, didn’t trust fault containment w/n a zone

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra cont’d? • Particularly well suited to working around EC2 availability • Needed a cross AZ strategy - we had seen EBS issues in the past, didn’t trust fault containment w/n a zone • Didn’t want locality of replication so needed to stripe across AZs

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra cont’d? • Particularly well suited to working around EC2 availability • Needed a cross AZ strategy - we had seen EBS issues in the past, didn’t trust fault containment w/n a zone • Didn’t want locality of replication so needed to stripe across AZs • Read repair and handoff generally did the right thing when a node would flap (Ubuntu #708920)

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra cont’d? • Particularly well suited to working around EC2 availability • Needed a cross AZ strategy - we had seen EBS issues in the past, didn’t trust fault containment w/n a zone • Didn’t want locality of replication so needed to stripe across AZs • Read repair and handoff generally did the right thing when a node would flap (Ubuntu #708920) • No SPoF

Cassandra at Urban Airship• Why Cassandra cont’d? • Particularly well suited to working around EC2 availability • Needed a cross AZ strategy - we had seen EBS issues in the past, didn’t trust fault containment w/n a zone • Didn’t want locality of replication so needed to stripe across AZs • Read repair and handoff generally did the right thing when a node would flap (Ubuntu #708920) • No SPoF • Ability to alter CLs on a per operation basis

Battle Scars - Development

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model • Creating indexes after the fact is a PITA

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model • Creating indexes after the fact is a PITA • Design around wide rows

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model • Creating indexes after the fact is a PITA • Design around wide rows • I/O problems

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model • Creating indexes after the fact is a PITA • Design around wide rows • I/O problems • Thrift problems

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model • Creating indexes after the fact is a PITA • Design around wide rows • I/O problems • Thrift problems • Count problems

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model • Creating indexes after the fact is a PITA • Design around wide rows • I/O problems • Thrift problems • Count problems • Favor JSON over packed binaries if possible

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model • Creating indexes after the fact is a PITA • Design around wide rows • I/O problems • Thrift problems • Count problems • Favor JSON over packed binaries if possible• Careful with Thrift in the stack

Battle Scars - Development• Know your data model • Creating indexes after the fact is a PITA • Design around wide rows • I/O problems • Thrift problems • Count problems • Favor JSON over packed binaries if possible• Careful with Thrift in the stack• Don’t fear the StorageProxy

Battle Scars - Development

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client • Read timeout vs. connection refused

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client • Read timeout vs. connection refused • When maintaining your own indexes, try and cleanup after failure

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client • Read timeout vs. connection refused • When maintaining your own indexes, try and cleanup after failure • Be ready to cleanup inconsistencies anyway

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client • Read timeout vs. connection refused • When maintaining your own indexes, try and cleanup after failure • Be ready to cleanup inconsistencies anyway • Verify client library assumptions and exception handling

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client • Read timeout vs. connection refused • When maintaining your own indexes, try and cleanup after failure • Be ready to cleanup inconsistencies anyway • Verify client library assumptions and exception handling • Retry now vs. retry later?

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client • Read timeout vs. connection refused • When maintaining your own indexes, try and cleanup after failure • Be ready to cleanup inconsistencies anyway • Verify client library assumptions and exception handling • Retry now vs. retry later? • Compensating action during failures?

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client • Read timeout vs. connection refused • When maintaining your own indexes, try and cleanup after failure • Be ready to cleanup inconsistencies anyway • Verify client library assumptions and exception handling • Retry now vs. retry later? • Compensating action during failures?• Don’t avoid the Cassandra code

Battle Scars - Development• Assume failure in the client • Read timeout vs. connection refused • When maintaining your own indexes, try and cleanup after failure • Be ready to cleanup inconsistencies anyway • Verify client library assumptions and exception handling • Retry now vs. retry later? • Compensating action during failures?• Don’t avoid the Cassandra code• Embed for testing

Battle Scars - Ops

Battle Scars - Ops• Cassandra in EC2:

Battle Scars - Ops• Cassandra in EC2: • Ensure Dynamic Snitch is enabled

Battle Scars - Ops• Cassandra in EC2: • Ensure Dynamic Snitch is enabled • Disk I/O

Battle Scars - Ops• Cassandra in EC2: • Ensure Dynamic Snitch is enabled • Disk I/O • Avoid EBS except for snapshot backups or use S3

Battle Scars - Ops• Cassandra in EC2: • Ensure Dynamic Snitch is enabled • Disk I/O • Avoid EBS except for snapshot backups or use S3 • Stripe ephemerals, not EBS volumes

Battle Scars - Ops• Cassandra in EC2: • Ensure Dynamic Snitch is enabled • Disk I/O • Avoid EBS except for snapshot backups or use S3 • Stripe ephemerals, not EBS volumes • Avoid smaller instances all together

Battle Scars - Ops• Cassandra in EC2: • Ensure Dynamic Snitch is enabled • Disk I/O • Avoid EBS except for snapshot backups or use S3 • Stripe ephemerals, not EBS volumes • Avoid smaller instances all together • Don’t always assume traversing close proximity AZs is more expensive

Battle Scars - Ops• Cassandra in EC2: • Ensure Dynamic Snitch is enabled • Disk I/O • Avoid EBS except for snapshot backups or use S3 • Stripe ephemerals, not EBS volumes • Avoid smaller instances all together • Don’t always assume traversing close proximity AZs is more expensive • Balance RAM cost vs. the cost of additional hosts and spending time w/ GC logs

Battle Scars - Ops

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices:

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices: • All Java services are managed via the same set of scripts

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices: • All Java services are managed via the same set of scripts • In most cases, operators don’t treat Cassandra different from HBase

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices: • All Java services are managed via the same set of scripts • In most cases, operators don’t treat Cassandra different from HBase • Simple mechanism to take thread or heap dump

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices: • All Java services are managed via the same set of scripts • In most cases, operators don’t treat Cassandra different from HBase • Simple mechanism to take thread or heap dump • All logging is consistent - GC, application, stdx

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices: • All Java services are managed via the same set of scripts • In most cases, operators don’t treat Cassandra different from HBase • Simple mechanism to take thread or heap dump • All logging is consistent - GC, application, stdx • Init scripts use the same scripts operators do

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices: • All Java services are managed via the same set of scripts • In most cases, operators don’t treat Cassandra different from HBase • Simple mechanism to take thread or heap dump • All logging is consistent - GC, application, stdx • Init scripts use the same scripts operators do • Bare metal will rock your world

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices: • All Java services are managed via the same set of scripts • In most cases, operators don’t treat Cassandra different from HBase • Simple mechanism to take thread or heap dump • All logging is consistent - GC, application, stdx • Init scripts use the same scripts operators do • Bare metal will rock your world • +UseLargePages will rock your world too

Battle Scars - Ops ParNew GC Effectiveness Mean Time ParNew GC300 0.04225 0.03150 0.02 75 0.01 0 0 MB Collected Collection Time (ms) Bare Metal EC2 XL Bare Metal EC2 XL ParNew Collection Count 60000 45000 30000 15000 0 Number of Collections Bare Metal EC2 XL

Battle Scars - Ops

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices cont’d:

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices cont’d: • Get familiar with GC logs (-XX:+PrintGCDetails)

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices cont’d: • Get familiar with GC logs (-XX:+PrintGCDetails) • Understand what degenerate CMS collection looks like

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices cont’d: • Get familiar with GC logs (-XX:+PrintGCDetails) • Understand what degenerate CMS collection looks like • We settled at -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=60

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices cont’d: • Get familiar with GC logs (-XX:+PrintGCDetails) • Understand what degenerate CMS collection looks like • We settled at -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=60 • Possibly experiment with tenuring threshold

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices cont’d: • Get familiar with GC logs (-XX:+PrintGCDetails) • Understand what degenerate CMS collection looks like • We settled at -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=60 • Possibly experiment with tenuring threshold • When in doubt take a thread dump

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices cont’d: • Get familiar with GC logs (-XX:+PrintGCDetails) • Understand what degenerate CMS collection looks like • We settled at -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=60 • Possibly experiment with tenuring threshold • When in doubt take a thread dump • TDA (http://java.net/projects/tda/)

Battle Scars - Ops• Java Best Practices cont’d: • Get familiar with GC logs (-XX:+PrintGCDetails) • Understand what degenerate CMS collection looks like • We settled at -XX:CMSInitiatingOccupancyFraction=60 • Possibly experiment with tenuring threshold • When in doubt take a thread dump • TDA (http://java.net/projects/tda/) • Eclipse MAT (http://www.eclipse.org/mat/)

Battle Scars - Ops

Battle Scars - Ops• Understand when to compact

Battle Scars - Ops• Understand when to compact• Understand upgrade implications for datafiles

Battle Scars - Ops• Understand when to compact• Understand upgrade implications for datafiles• Watch hinted handoff closely

Battle Scars - Ops• Understand when to compact• Understand upgrade implications for datafiles• Watch hinted handoff closely• Monitor JMX religiously

Looking Forward

Looking Forward• Cassandra is a great hammer but not everything is a nail

Looking Forward• Cassandra is a great hammer but not everything is a nail• Coprocessors would be awesome (hint hint)

Looking Forward• Cassandra is a great hammer but not everything is a nail• Coprocessors would be awesome (hint hint)• Still spend too much time worrying about GC

Looking Forward• Cassandra is a great hammer but not everything is a nail• Coprocessors would be awesome (hint hint)• Still spend too much time worrying about GC• Glad to see the ecosystem around the product evolving

Looking Forward• Cassandra is a great hammer but not everything is a nail• Coprocessors would be awesome (hint hint)• Still spend too much time worrying about GC• Glad to see the ecosystem around the product evolving • CQL

Looking Forward• Cassandra is a great hammer but not everything is a nail• Coprocessors would be awesome (hint hint)• Still spend too much time worrying about GC• Glad to see the ecosystem around the product evolving • CQL • Pig

Looking Forward• Cassandra is a great hammer but not everything is a nail• Coprocessors would be awesome (hint hint)• Still spend too much time worrying about GC• Glad to see the ecosystem around the product evolving • CQL • Pig • Brisk

Looking Forward• Cassandra is a great hammer but not everything is a nail• Coprocessors would be awesome (hint hint)• Still spend too much time worrying about GC• Glad to see the ecosystem around the product evolving • CQL • Pig • Brisk• Guardedly optimistic about off heap data management

Thanks to• jbellis, driftx• Datastax• Whoever wrote TDA• SAP

Thanks!• Urban Airship: http://urbanairship.com/• We’re hiring! http://urbanairship.com/company/jobs/• Me @eonnen or erik at

http://lanyrd.com	40
http://a0.twimg.com	2
http://twitter.com	1
http://us-w1.rockmelt.com	1

From 100s to 100s of Millions

by eonnen on Jul 19, 2011

Accessibility

Categories

Tags

Upload Details

Usage Rights

4 Embeds 44

Statistics

From 100s to 100s of Millions — Presentation Transcript