racing against each other, we know
only one of them will win and the client who issued that write can be sure
about it.
How does the above scheme sound?
-Rishi
From: Mike Malone
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Sent: Tue, June 22, 2010 9:27:44 PM
Subject: Re: Atomi
On Wed, Jun 23, 2010 at 4:51 AM, aaron morton wrote:
> I've been playing with something like CAS, it's not the same but it may be
> of interest.
>
> I write some data into Cassandra with quorum or better consistency, that
> allows me to assert what it should look like when read back. If the
> asse
at sounds great. I am definitely going to look into this and
report
back if I have a good solution.
Thanks,
Rishi
From: Sylvain Lebresne
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Sent: Tue, June 22, 2010 1:21:51 AM
Subject: Re: Atomic Compare and Swap
On Mon, Jun 21, 2
said, if you have a neat solution for efficient and
> distributed
> >atomic CAS that doesn't require rewriting 80% of Cassandra, I'm sure there
> >will be interest in that.
>
>
> R: That sounds great. I am definitely going to look into this and report
> back
hat.
R: That sounds great. I am definitely going to look into this and report back
if I have a good solution.
Thanks,
Rishi
From: Sylvain Lebresne
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Sent: Tue, June 22, 2010 1:21:51 AM
Subject: Re: Atomic Compare and Swap
On Mo
hi
>
>
>
> ________________
> From: Rauan Maemirov
> To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
> Sent: Mon, June 21, 2010 11:27:02 AM
> Subject: Re: Atomic Compare and Swap
>
> Have you read this post?
> http://ria101.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/locking-and-transact
would love any pointers from
others about this.
Thanks,
Rishi
From: Rauan Maemirov
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Sent: Mon, June 21, 2010 11:27:02 AM
Subject: Re: Atomic Compare and Swap
Have you read this post?
http://ria101.wordpress.com/2010/05/12/locking
t: Sun, June 20, 2010 9:47:37 PM
> Subject: Re: Atomic Compare and Swap
>
>
> I too am interested in a CAS facility.
>
> I like Rishi's proposal. One could simply use a version number as the
> logical timestamp. If we promote CAS to a consistency level, it would rate
> hig
Srinivasan
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Sent: Sun, June 20, 2010 9:47:37 PM
Subject: Re: Atomic Compare and Swap
I too am interested in a CAS facility.
I like Rishi's proposal. One could simply use a version number as the logical
timestamp. If we promote CAS to a consistency level, it would
I too am interested in a CAS facility.
I like Rishi's proposal. One could simply use a version number as the
logical timestamp. If we promote CAS to a consistency level, it would
rate higher than a quorum. One pays the price for a more complex write
path to obtain the requisite guarantee.
older" writes to win over "newer" writes. Do you think such a thing can
be accomplished?
Thanks for all the help,
Rishi
From: David Timothy Strauss
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Sent: Sun, June 20, 2010 3:08:18 PM
Subject: Re: Atomic Compare and S
That is impossible to implement without making the write path at least as slow
as the read path. Things like this typically get layed on Cassandra by using an
external locking framework, like Zookeeper.
-Original Message-
From: Rishi Bhardwaj
Date: Sun, 20 Jun 2010 14:57:46
To:
Reply-
12 matches
Mail list logo
