cassandra-commits mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From "Nate McCall (JIRA)" <j...@apache.org>
Subject [jira] [Resolved] (CASSANDRA-13225) Best Consistency Level
Date Wed, 15 Feb 2017 23:33:41 GMT

     [ https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13225?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:all-tabpanel
]

Nate McCall resolved CASSANDRA-13225.
-------------------------------------
    Resolution: Won't Fix

I'm marking this as won't fix. [~Connor Warrington] I do appreciate you raising the issue.
Feel free to discuss/request more information on #cassandra IRC or on the mailing list.

> Best Consistency Level
> ----------------------
>
>                 Key: CASSANDRA-13225
>                 URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-13225
>             Project: Cassandra
>          Issue Type: New Feature
>            Reporter: Connor Warrington
>            Priority: Minor
>
> When writing data into a cluster there are a few consistency levels to choose from. When
choosing the consistency level to write with you are making a tradeoff between consistency
and failover availability. If you choose consistency level ALL then all replicas have to be
up and when a write succeeds all replicas received the write. If you choose consistency level
QUORUM then a quorum number of replicas have to be up and when a write succeeds at quorum
number of replicas received the write. The tradeoff comes in when there are more then quorum
nodes available for the write. We would like a write to succeed only when all replicas that
are up have received the write. Hence the suggestion of best as a consistency level. This
would be available for the existing consistency levels. The main idea behind this feature
request is that we are okay with a replica going down (fault tolerance) but when the cluster
is in a good state we don't mind waiting for all nodes to get the write. This would enable
the writer to operate at speed of the slowest node instead of potentially getting into a state
where that slow node gets even further behind. This would also enable back pressure to be
better propagated through the system as the slowest node likely has back pressure which is
trying to tell the client about but if we don't wait for that node the writer loses that information.
> Example scenarios:
> If we have replication factor of 3: 
> ALL consistency means 3 replicas have to be up and 3 replicas have to successfully get
the write. 
> QUORUM consistency means 2 replicas have to be up and 2 replicas have to successfully
get the write. 
> BEST_QUORUM consistency means 2 replicas have be up and all up replicas have to successfully
get the write.
> If 3 replicas are up with replication factor of 3: 
> ALL would succeed as all 3 replicas are up and would return success when all 3 replicas
get the write 
> QUORUM would succeed as all 3 replicas are up and would return success when 2 replicas
get the write 
> BEST_QUORUM would succeed as all 3 replicas are up and would return success when all
3 replicas get the write
> If 2 replicas are up with replication factor of 3: 
> ALL would fail as only 2 replicas are up 
> QUORUM would succeed as 2 replicas are up and would return success when 2 replicas get
the write 
> BEST_QUORUM would succeed as 2 replicas are up and would return success when 2 replicas
get the write



--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.15#6346)

Mime
View raw message