Return-Path: X-Original-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@www.apache.org Received: from mail.apache.org (hermes.apache.org [140.211.11.3]) by minotaur.apache.org (Postfix) with SMTP id 97E8247B4 for ; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 01:08:32 +0000 (UTC) Received: (qmail 35072 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jun 2011 01:08:30 -0000 Delivered-To: apmail-cassandra-user-archive@cassandra.apache.org Received: (qmail 34881 invoked by uid 500); 28 Jun 2011 01:08:29 -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 34871 invoked by uid 99); 28 Jun 2011 01:08:29 -0000 Received: from nike.apache.org (HELO nike.apache.org) (192.87.106.230) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 01:08:29 +0000 X-ASF-Spam-Status: No, hits=3.2 required=5.0 tests=FREEMAIL_ENVFROM_END_DIGIT,FREEMAIL_FROM,HK_RANDOM_ENVFROM,HK_RANDOM_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 teddyyyy123@gmail.com designates 209.85.213.172 as permitted sender) Received: from [209.85.213.172] (HELO mail-yx0-f172.google.com) (209.85.213.172) by apache.org (qpsmtpd/0.29) with ESMTP; Tue, 28 Jun 2011 01:08:23 +0000 Received: by yxp4 with SMTP id 4so586270yxp.31 for ; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:08:02 -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=lp2WD5Om8g2b1fZUmtP+mdA3rfWtYktwFzisJ+C29m4=; b=gAA0P6S3k3OLlJXM7b0n+QqagTIAnyCYYHO5deHg8xESXiiL2Xaw8hBnyEj1QkASS/ NYsUmncnmpu8XlsCM+I+RA904tzSUDnodhpS5dppHlx6r8D2o84rRKptlXCSer/phn9s 9SKdSIV6RpHNIvcidQEdNlP7cNBAycizAUXi0= 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=OQpDgCUWJRis7skOZs8wRj5yU1+rabFRBySCR2JPp5EOtCteCRKREdmNaIYqQylnG4 UAmYIWIYnDZ/7NSKXmOnuqn7ysSXVNl1qsXkmeV4t6+RoGHCcRLywBx3Byi7+eH4LcYB sB25myVHnmJsz7kCocK8vTi8fDitayrVDFHnI= MIME-Version: 1.0 Received: by 10.236.108.179 with SMTP id q39mr10957260yhg.374.1309223281872; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:08:01 -0700 (PDT) Received: by 10.236.69.130 with HTTP; Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:08:01 -0700 (PDT) In-Reply-To: References: Date: Mon, 27 Jun 2011 18:08:01 -0700 Message-ID: Subject: Re: Clock skew From: Yang To: user@cassandra.apache.org Content-Type: multipart/alternative; boundary=90e6ba53a62ea5d06904a6bb4cba X-Virus-Checked: Checked by ClamAV on apache.org --90e6ba53a62ea5d06904a6bb4cba Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 oftentimes people use time actually subconsciously to express causal relations ("before/after"), as long as you have some other means to establish causal relations, you don't really need to have an exactly clock. On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 4:54 PM, aaron morton wrote: > Without exception the timestamp is set by the client, not the server. The > one exception to the without exception rule is CounterColumnType operations. > > If you are in a situation where you need better timing than you can get > with ntp you should try to design around it. > > Hope that helps. > ----------------- > Aaron Morton > Freelance Cassandra Developer > @aaronmorton > http://www.thelastpickle.com > > On 28 Jun 2011, at 10:03, A J wrote: > > > During writes, the timestamp field in the column is the system-time of > > that node (correct me if that is not the case and the system-time of > > the co-ordinator is what gets applied to all the replicas). > > During reads, the latest write wins. > > > > What if there is a clock skew ? It could lead to a stale write > > over-riding the actual latest write, just because the clock of that > > node is ahead of the other node. Right ? > > --90e6ba53a62ea5d06904a6bb4cba Content-Type: text/html; charset=ISO-8859-1 Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable oftentimes people use time actually subconsciously to express causal relati= ons ("before/after"), as long as you have some other means to=A0<= div>establish causal relations, you don't really need to have an exactl= y clock.

On Mon, Jun 27, 2011 at 4:54 PM, aaron morto= n <aaron@th= elastpickle.com> wrote:
Without exception the timestamp is set by the client, not the server. The o= ne exception to the without exception rule is CounterColumnType operations.=

If you are in a situation where you need better timing than you can get wit= h ntp you should try to design around it.

Hope that helps.
-----------------
Aaron Morton
Freelance Cassandra Developer
@aaronmorton
http://www.thela= stpickle.com

On 28 Jun 2011, at 10:03, A J wrote:

> During writes, the timestamp field in the column is the system-time of=
> that node (correct me if that is not the case and the system-time of > the co-ordinator is what gets applied to all the replicas).
> During reads, the latest write wins.
>
> What if there is a clock skew ? It could lead to a stale write
> over-riding the actual latest write, just because the clock of that > node is ahead of the other node. Right ?


--90e6ba53a62ea5d06904a6bb4cba--