accumulo-dev mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From David Medinets <david.medin...@gmail.com>
Subject Re: Does FATE equate to a transaction at the Mutation level?
Date Sun, 01 Jul 2012 16:11:59 GMT
<sigh> Which your presentation explained basically on the next slide
... I should have read more.

On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:09 PM, Adam Fuchs <afuchs@apache.org> wrote:
> FATE is really designed to provide low frequency atomic operations across
> distributed subcomponents components, rather than the high-speed
> transactions across distributed partitions that Foundation DB supports.
> Performance in terms of transactions per second is limited with FATE, and
> certainly doesn't scale linearly as the cluster grows.
>
> Adam
>
>
> On Sun, Jul 1, 2012 at 12:00 PM, David Medinets <david.medinets@gmail.com>wrote:
>
>> I went to a talk about Foundation DB the other day. They said that
>> Foundation DB was the only NoSQL tool with transactions. But then I
>> thought, does FATE serve as a transaction boundary ... at least for
>> Mutations?
>>

Mime
View raw message