Return-Path: Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: (qmail 3296 invoked from network); 29 Mar 2011 03:23:23 -0000 Received: from hermes.apache.org (HELO mail.apache.org) (140.211.11.3) by minotaur.apache.org with SMTP; 29 Mar 2011 03:23:23 -0000 Received: (qmail 34883 invoked by uid 500); 29 Mar 2011 03:23:21 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 34855 invoked by uid 500); 29 Mar 2011 03:23:20 -0000 Mailing-List: contact user-help@cassandra.apache.org; run by ezmlm Precedence: bulk List-Help: List-Unsubscribe: List-Post: List-Id: Reply-To: user@cassandra.apache.org Delivered-To: mailing list user@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 34847 invoked by uid 99); 29 Mar 2011 03:23:19 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 03:23:19 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=1.5 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_FROM,HTML_MESSAGE,RCVD_IN_DNSWL_LOW,SPF_PASS,T_TO_NO_BRKTS_FREEMAIL X-Spam-Check-By: apache.org Received-SPF: pass (nike.apache.org: domain of narendra.sharma@gmail.com designates 209.85.161.172 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.161.172] (HELO mail-gx0-f172.google.com) (209.85.161.172) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 29 Mar 2011 03:23:13 +0000 Received: by gxk19 with SMTP id 19so1634099gxk.31 for ; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:22:52 -0700 (PDT) DKIM-Signature: v=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=domainkey-signature:mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date :message-id:subject:from:to:content-type; bh=fgjbxIbffzl3NKRvYtUEJrPTNz7lDELwiZHV8L9EXJs=; b=RIGNSWDmtWc+iRkh4ZhudrgWo8WgApSPQZWsV02UDLVhga/0Or9vRBjoFLBxmbdSBg 63tpy4S3WNgqtEaoXTF+QTW8iYCPN6jgupNg18enuWHM7fMmeJB60DJ1QFllwIeCRc2z xmnVprxOLAegC8cVLwaG4VjjoBOJsbVeYy2Dw= DomainKey-Signature: a=rsa-sha1; c=nofws; d=gmail.com; s=gamma; h=mime-version:in-reply-to:references:date:message-id:subject:from:to :content-type; b=ikXhDRMTzXRl0L52BFH4ViIK3HXoqlc8yUXJ1CnoxPu3nOSWEK6qWxqBkwmZLhVKZz oySsN9vbGNOARfZw8H15UiuFz4f9wJcLLq/IQWAVzhuZ74TDWbVjIDxPIQFuqB++dCsl MAborxOjDh/0bZ25y2td8yN0Pdx3gGSasDgTQ= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.91.204.26 with SMTP id g26mr86884agq.94.1301368972285; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:22:52 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.90.115.19 with HTTP; Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:22:52 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 28 Mar 2011 20:22:52 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: atomicity in cassandra From: Narendra Sharma To: user@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=001636af017e50971d049f9693fa X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --001636af017e50971d049f9693fa Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 There is no undo or redo log in Cassandra. From Cassandra perspective if the operation gets logged in commit log, it is considered committed. Remember the eventual consistency... On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Saurabh Sehgal wrote: > I have seen this question pop up once or twice in mailing lists regarding > atomicity when using batch_mutate() operations. I understand that the > operations in batch_mutate() should be idempotent and do not get rolled back > on failures. However, a client crashing (due to machine issues, networking > issue etc) in the middle of such a transaction can leave the data in an > inconsistent state. Is there a way to figure out such inconsistencies ? Will > Cassandra keep a log of failed batch_mutate() operations, or partially > completed operations, that might require manual intervention when the client > comes back up ? > > -- Narendra Sharma Solution Architect *http://www.persistentsys.com* *http://narendrasharma.blogspot.com/* --001636af017e50971d049f9693fa Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable There is no undo or redo log in Cassandra. From Cassandra perspective if th= e operation gets logged in commit log, it is considered committed.

=
Remember the eventual consistency...



On Mon, Mar 28, 2011 at 6:21 PM, Saurabh= Sehgal <saur= abh.r.s@gmail.com> wrote:
I have seen this question pop up once or twice in mailing lists = regarding atomicity when using batch_mutate() operations. I understand that= the operations in batch_mutate() should be idempotent and do not get rolle= d back on failures. However, a client crashing (due to machine issues, netw= orking issue etc) in the middle of such a transaction can leave the data in= an inconsistent state. Is there a way to figure out such inconsistencies ?= Will Cassandra keep a log of failed batch_mutate() operations, or partiall= y completed operations, that might require manual intervention when the cli= ent comes back up ?




--
Narendra Sharma
--001636af017e50971d049f9693fa--