See my latest comment 2017-02-10 14:33 GMT+01:00 Salih Gedik <m...@salih.xyz>:
> I agree with Brian. As far as I am concerned an update of materialized > view is an async operation. Therefore I don't believe that you'd get most > up to date data. > > Salih Gedik > > > > On 10 Feb 2017, at 16:11, Brian Hess <brianmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > > > This is not true. > > > > You cannot provide a ConsistencyLevel for the Materialized Views on a > table when you do a write. That is, you do not explicitly write to a > Materialized View, but implicitly write to it via the base table. There is > not consistency guarantee other than eventual between the base table and > the Materialized View. That is, the coordinator only acknowledges the write > when the proper number of replicas in the base table have acknowledged > successful writing. There is no waiting or acknowledgement for any > Materialized Views on that table. > > > > Therefore, while you can specify a Consistency Level on read since you > are reading directly from the Materialized View as a table, you cannot > specify a Consistency Level on wrote for the Materialized View. So, you > cannot apply the R+W>RF formula. > > > > ---->Brian > > > >> On Feb 10, 2017, at 3:17 AM, Kant Kodali <k...@peernova.com> wrote: > >> > >> thanks! > >> > >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Benjamin Roth <benjamin.r...@jaumo.com> > >> wrote: > >> > >>> Yes it is > >>> > >>> Am 10.02.2017 00:46 schrieb "Kant Kodali" <k...@peernova.com>: > >>> > >>>> If reading from materialized view with a consistency level of quorum > am I > >>>> guaranteed to have the most recent view? other words is w + r > n > >>> contract > >>>> maintained for MV's as well for both reads and writes? > >>>> > >>>> Thanks! > >>> > > -- Benjamin Roth Prokurist Jaumo GmbH · www.jaumo.com Wehrstraße 46 · 73035 Göppingen · Germany Phone +49 7161 304880-6 · Fax +49 7161 304880-1 AG Ulm · HRB 731058 · Managing Director: Jens Kammerer
