cassandra-user mailing list archives

Site index · List index
Message view « Date » · « Thread »
Top « Date » · « Thread »
From Cagatay Kavukcuoglu <>
Subject Re: Does anybody work about transaction on cassandra ?
Date Mon, 26 Apr 2010 16:09:15 GMT
Better fault tolerance? Scalability to large data volumes? A combination of ZooKeeper based
transactions and Cassandra may have better characteristics than RDBMS on these criteria. There's
no question that trade-offs are involved, but as far as these issues are concerned, you'd
be starting from a better vantage point than a SPOF relational database. 

On Apr 26, 2010, at 10:24 AM, Mark Jones wrote:

> Orthogonal in this case means “at cross purposes”  Transactions can’t really be
done with eventual consistency because all nodes don’t have all the info at the time the
transaction is done.  I think they recommend zookeeper for this kind of stuff, but I don’t
know why you want to use Cassandra vs a RDBMS if you really want transactions.
> From: dir dir [] 
> Sent: Saturday, April 24, 2010 12:08 PM
> To:
> Subject: Re: Does anybody work about transaction on cassandra ?
> >Transactions are orthogonal to the design of Cassandra
> Sorry, Would you want to tell me what is an orthogonal mean in this context??
> honestly I do not understand what is it.
> Thank you.
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 9:14 PM, Miguel Verde <> wrote:
> No, as far as I know no one is working on transaction support in Cassandra.  Transactions
are orthogonal to the design of Cassandra[1][2], although a system could be designed incorporating
Cassandra and other elements a la Google's MegaStore[3] to support transactions.  Google uses
Paxos, one might be able to use Zookeeper[4] to design such a system, but it would be a daunting
> [1]
> [2]
> [3]
> [4]
> On Thu, Apr 22, 2010 at 2:56 AM, Jeff Zhang <> wrote:
> Hi all,
> I need transaction support on cassandra, so wondering is anybody work on it ?
> --
> Best Regards
> Jeff Zhang

View raw message