Re: Replication factor, LOCAL_QUORUM write consistency and materialized views

Hi, On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 6:18 PM Jon Haddad wrote: > I strongly suggest you don't use materialized views at all. There are > edge cases that in my opinion make them unsuitable for production, both in > terms of cluster stability as well as data integrity. > Oh, there is already an open and

Re: Replication factor, LOCAL_QUORUM write consistency and materialized views

gt; crashes temporarily, I can also see on the calling side (Java backend) that >> no nodes are responding: >> >> Caused by: com.datastax.driver.core.exceptions.WriteFailureException: >> Cassandra failure during write query at consistency LOCAL_QUORUM (2 >> responses were required but only 1 replica responded, 2 fai

Re: Replication factor, LOCAL_QUORUM write consistency and materialized views

s fine. > But, a table with more than one materialized view, whoops, the cluster > crashes temporarily, I can also see on the calling side (Java backend) that > no nodes are responding: > > Caused by: com.datastax.driver.core.exceptions.WriteFailureException: > Cassandra failure dur

Replication factor, LOCAL_QUORUM write consistency and materialized views

more than one materialized view, whoops, the cluster crashes temporarily, I can also see on the calling side (Java backend) that no nodes are responding: Caused by: com.datastax.driver.core.exceptions.WriteFailureException: Cassandra failure during write query at consistency LOCAL_QUORUM (2 resp

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. ] Ninad, > Here's a bit more information: > > -Few rows in this column

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

of your help ! From: Mick Semb Wever Sent: Wednesday, October 24, 2018 4:12:57 AM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachme

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

Ninad, > Here's a bit more information: > > -Few rows in this column family can grow quite wide (> 100K columns) > > -But we keep seeing this behavior most frequently with rows with just 1 or > two columns . The typical behavior is: Machine A adds a new row and a column. > 30-60 seconds later Ma

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

e.org Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. ] > Thanks James. Yeah, we're using the datastax java driver. But we're on > version 2.

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

ant. Also worth checking that any local_quorum requests are not accidentally go to the wrong datacenter. regards, Mick - To unsubscribe, e-mail: user-unsubscr...@cassandra.apache.org For additional commands, e-mail: user-h...@cassandra.apache.org

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

Yup. Verified again that this table is being written, read, and replicated to just one data center. From: Naik, Ninad Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 1:18:43 PM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) Let

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

Let me double check that. From: Jeff Jirsa Sent: Monday, October 15, 2018 11:49:10 AM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

:55:17 PM > To: user@cassandra.apache.org > Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) > > [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use > caution when clicking links or opening attachments. ] > > If this is 2.1 AND you do

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

Thanks Jeff. We're not doing deletes, but I will take a look at this jira. From: Jeff Jirsa Sent: Sunday, October 14, 2018 12:55:17 PM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) [ This email has been

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

@cassandra.apache.org > Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) > > [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use > caution when clicking links or opening attachments. ] > > We have seen inconsistent read if the clock on the no

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

2:55:51 PM > > *To:* user@cassandra.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) > > > [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use > caution when clicking links or opening attachments. ] > Are you using the Java driver? The

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. ] Are you using the Java driver? The default timestamp generator is client-side now (since 3.0 I believe), so if you don’t

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

che.org Subject: Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. ] I'll second that - we had some weird inconsistent reads for a long time that we finall

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

the things we > verified. The clocks on cassandra nodes are in sync. > -- > *From:* maitrayee shah > *Sent:* Friday, October 12, 2018 6:40:25 PM > *To:* user@cassandra.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) > &

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

reads (LOCAL_QUORUM) [ This email has been sent from a source external to Epsilon. Please use caution when clicking links or opening attachments. ] We have seen inconsistent read if the clock on the nodes are not in sync. Thank you Sent from my iPhone On Oct 12, 2018, at 1:50 PM, Naik, Ninad

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

it doesn't retry. If we manually retry, we see all >the columns. >- A few columns exist for a row key. And a new column 'n' is added. > When a read happens after the write, all columns but 'n' are returned. > > Here's what we've verified: &g

Re: Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

retry, we see all the columns. > A few columns exist for a row key. And a new column 'n' is added. When a read > happens after the write, all columns but 'n' are returned. > Here's what we've verified: > > Both writes and reads are using 'LOCAL_QUORUM

Cassandra: Inconsistent data on reads (LOCAL_QUORUM)

te so it doesn't retry. If we manually retry, we see all the columns. * A few columns exist for a row key. And a new column 'n' is added. When a read happens after the write, all columns but 'n' are returned. Here's what we've verified: * Both write

Re: WriteTimeoutException with LOCAL_QUORUM

t, Romain Le Mardi 6 septembre 2016 6h47, "adeline@thomsonreuters.com" a écrit :     From: Pan, Adeline (TR Technology & Ops) Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 12:34 PM To: 'user@cassandra.apache.org' Cc: Yang, Ling (TR Technology & Ops) Subject: FW:

WriteTimeoutException with LOCAL_QUORUM

From: Pan, Adeline (TR Technology & Ops) Sent: Tuesday, September 06, 2016 12:34 PM To: 'user@cassandra.apache.org' Cc: Yang, Ling (TR Technology & Ops) Subject: FW: WriteTimeoutException with LOCAL_QUORUM Hi All, I hope you are doing well today, and I need your help. We were

Re: Consistency Level (QUORUM vs LOCAL_QUORUM)

On Thu, Mar 31, 2016 at 4:35 AM, Alain RODRIGUEZ wrote: > My understanding is using RF 3 and LOCAL_QUORUM for both reads and writes > will provide a strong consistency and a high availability. One node can go > down and also without lowering the consistency. Or RF = 5, Quorum = 3, >

Re: Consistency Level (QUORUM vs LOCAL_QUORUM)

Hi, If you want the full immediate consistency of a traditional relational > database, then go with CL=ALL, otherwise, take your pick from the many > degrees of immediacy that Cassandra offers: My understanding is using RF 3 and LOCAL_QUORUM for both reads and writes will provide a

Re: How is the coordinator node in LOCAL_QUORUM chosen?

I always explicitly specify the local DC in my apps for the DC aware round robin policy in a multi DC deployment (localDC arg on the constructor) http://docs.datastax.com/en/drivers/nodejs/3.0/module-policies_loadBalancing-DCAwareRoundRobinPolicy.html Maybe just do that if you want to specify it

Re: How is the coordinator node in LOCAL_QUORUM chosen?

How this works is probably documented in greater detail at the link I provided before than I can do justice to here. TokenAware uses its configured child strategy to determine node locality. DCAwareRoundRobin uses a configuration property, or if all of its seed nodes are in the same DC it assumes

Re: How is the coordinator node in LOCAL_QUORUM chosen?

Thanks for the explanation. My question is * How the client driver would determine which cassandra node is considered "local". Is it auto discovered (if so, how?) or manually specified somewhere? * Whether local_xxx consistencies always fail when a partition is not replicated in the local DC, a

Re: How is the coordinator node in LOCAL_QUORUM chosen?

> Local quorum works in the same data center as the coordinator node, but when an app server execute the write query, how is the coordinator node chosen? It typically depends on the driver, and decent drivers offer you several options for this, usually called load balancing strategy. You indicate

Re: Consistency Level (QUORUM vs LOCAL_QUORUM)

garding consistency Level settings in a multi Data > Center Environment. What is the preferred CL settings in this scenario for > an immediate consistency , QUORUM or LOCAL_QUORUM ? > > If the replication Factor is set to 3 each ( 2 Data Centers) , the QUORUM > ( writes/read)

Consistency Level (QUORUM vs LOCAL_QUORUM)

Hello, I have a question regarding consistency Level settings in a multi Data Center Environment.  What is the preferred CL settings in this scenario for an immediate consistency , QUORUM or LOCAL_QUORUM ? If the replication Factor is set to 3  each ( 2 Data Centers) , the QUORUM ( writes/read

Re: How is the coordinator node in LOCAL_QUORUM chosen?

On Fri, Mar 25, 2016 at 1:04 PM, X. F. Li wrote: > Suppose I have replication factor 3. If one of the node fails, will > queries with ALL consistency fail if the queried partition is on the failed > node? Or would they continue to work with 2 replicas during the time while > cassandra is replicat

How is the coordinator node in LOCAL_QUORUM chosen?

Hello, Local quorum works in the same data center as the coordinator node, but when an app server execute the write query, how is the coordinator node chosen? I use the node.js driver. How do the driver client determine which cassandra nodes are in the same DC as the client node? Does it use

Re: Trace evidence for LOCAL_QUORUM ending up in remote DC

Thanks for reporting back, Tom. Can you drop a comment on the ticket with a sentence or two describing your specific case and that speculative_retry = NONE was a valid work-around? That will make it easier for the next folks that come along to have a concrete problem/solution in a single comment

Re: Trace evidence for LOCAL_QUORUM ending up in remote DC

Nate, I've disabled it, and it's been running for about an hour now without problems, while before, the problem occurred roughly every few minutes. I guess it's safe to say that this proves that CASSANDRA-9753 is the cause of the problem. I'm

Re: Trace evidence for LOCAL_QUORUM ending up in remote DC

> > Just to be sure: can this bug result in a 0-row result while it should be > > 0 ? > Per Tyler's reference to CASSANDRA-9753 , you would see this if the read was routed by speculative retry to the nodes that were not yet finished being built.

Re: Trace evidence for LOCAL_QUORUM ending up in remote DC

Tom, I don't believe so; it seems the symptom would be an indefinite (or very long) hang. To clarify, is this issue restricted to LOCAL_QUORUM? Can you issue a LOCAL_ONE SELECT and retrieve the expected data back? On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 12:02 PM, Tom van den Berge < tom.vandenbe...@g

Re: Trace evidence for LOCAL_QUORUM ending up in remote DC

l.com> wrote: > >> I've been bugging you a few times, but now I've got trace data for a >> query with LOCAL_QUORUM that is being sent to a remove data center. >> >> The setup is as follows: >> NetworkTopologyStrategy: {"DC1":"1",&q

Re: Trace evidence for LOCAL_QUORUM ending up in remote DC

See https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9753 On Tue, Sep 8, 2015 at 10:22 AM, Tom van den Berge < tom.vandenbe...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've been bugging you a few times, but now I've got trace data for a query > with LOCAL_QUORUM that is being sent to a remov

Trace evidence for LOCAL_QUORUM ending up in remote DC

I've been bugging you a few times, but now I've got trace data for a query with LOCAL_QUORUM that is being sent to a remove data center. The setup is as follows: NetworkTopologyStrategy: {"DC1":"1","DC2":"2"} Both DC1 and DC2 have 2 nodes

Re: LOCAL_QUORUM without a replica in current data center

Sorry for the spam - but I wanted to double check if anyone had experience with such a scenario. Thanks. On Sun, Aug 17, 2014 at 7:11 PM, Viswanathan Ramachandran < vish.ramachand...@gmail.com> wrote: > Hi, > > How does LOCAL_QUORUM read/write behave when the data center on w

LOCAL_QUORUM without a replica in current data center

Hi, How does LOCAL_QUORUM read/write behave when the data center on which query is executed does not have a replica of the keyspace? Does it result in an error or can it be configured to do LOCAL_QUORUM on the "nearest" data center (as depicted by the dynamic snitch) which has the repl

Re: local_quorum

apache.org > *Subject:* local_quorum > > ** ** > > Hi – I have 2 data centres (DC1 and DC2) and I have local_quorum set as > the CL for reads. Say there is a RF factor = 2. (so 2 copies each in DC). > > > ** ** > > If both nodes which own the data in DC1 are down an

RE: local_quorum

Anyone ? From: Kanwar Sangha [mailto:kan...@mavenir.com] Sent: 03 May 2013 08:59 To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: local_quorum Hi - I have 2 data centres (DC1 and DC2) and I have local_quorum set as the CL for reads. Say there is a RF factor = 2. (so 2 copies each in DC). If both nodes

local_quorum

Hi - I have 2 data centres (DC1 and DC2) and I have local_quorum set as the CL for reads. Say there is a RF factor = 2. (so 2 copies each in DC). If both nodes which own the data in DC1 are down and I do a read with CL as "local_quorum" , will I get an error back to the application

Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

ction_strategy = > 'org.apache.cassandra.db.compaction.SizeTieredCompactionStrategy' > and caching = 'KEYS_ONLY' > and compression_options = {'sstable_compression' : > 'org.apache.cassandra.io.compress.SnappyCompressor'}; > > Regards > >

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

ppyCompressor'}; Regards -Original Message- From: aaron morton [mailto:aa...@thelastpickle.com] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 12:47 PM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM Can you provide the full create keyspace statement ? >

Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

AM, Dwight Smith wrote: > Yes – using NetworkTopologyStrategy > > From: aaron morton [mailto:aa...@thelastpickle.com] > Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 10:22 AM > To: user@cassandra.apache.org > Subject: Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM > > DEBUG

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

Yes - using NetworkTopologyStrategy From: aaron morton [mailto:aa...@thelastpickle.com] Sent: Thursday, March 21, 2013 10:22 AM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM DEBUG [Thrift:1] 2013-03-19 00:00:53,313 ReadCallback.java (line 79

Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

> DEBUG [Thrift:1] 2013-03-19 00:00:53,313 ReadCallback.java (line 79) Blockfor > is 2; setting up requests to /xx.yy.zz.146,/xx.yy.zz.143,/xx.yy.zz.145 > DEBUG [Thrift:1] 2013-03-19 00:00:53,334 CassandraServer.java (line 306) > get_slice > DEBUG [Thrift:1] 2013-03-19 00:00:53,334 ReadCallback.j

Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 3:18 PM, Tycen Stafford wrote: > I don’t think that’s correct for a mult-dc ring, but you’ll want to hear a > final answer from someone more authoritative. I could easily be wrong. > Try using the built in token generating tool (token-generator) – I don’t > seem to have i

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

;2": 141784319550391026443072753096570088106 } } -Tycen From: Dwight Smith [mailto:dwight.sm...@genesyslab.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:37 AM To: Dwight Smith; 'user@cassandra.apache.org' Subject: RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM Hmm - the rin

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

Yes – just when the node goes down. I’ll check 4705. Thanks From: Derek Williams [mailto:de...@fyrie.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 12:14 PM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM Are those timeouts happening right when the node

Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

0, 2013 11:50 AM > *To:* user@cassandra.apache.org > *Subject:* Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM > > ** ** > > I'm think I need help with pointing out what the problem is. The log you > posted only contains references to 143, 145, and 146,

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

Subject: Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM I'm think I need help with pointing out what the problem is. The log you posted only contains references to 143, 145, and 146, which all appear to be in the same datacenter as 146? On Wed, Mar 20, 2013 at 11:29 AM, Dwight

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

Yes that is correct – the log is from 146. The client connects to nodes in AZ1. From: Derek Williams [mailto:de...@fyrie.net] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:50 AM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM I'm think I need help

Re: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

147=AZ2:RAC2 > > xx.yy.zz.148=AZ2:RAC2**** > > xx.yy.zz.149=AZ2:RAC2 > > ** ** > > Using LOCAL_QUORUM, my understanding was that reads/writes would process > locally ( for the coordinator ) and send requests to the remaining nodes in > the DC,

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

AZ2 RAC2Up Normal 483.18 KB 100.00% 113427455640312821154458202477256070585 From: Dwight Smith Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:29 AM To: 'user@cassandra.apache.org' Subject: RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM Actually

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

Actually the tokens in AZ2 are not correct. I'll get those corrected - thanks for the pointer. From: Tycen Stafford [mailto:tstaff...@medio.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:25 AM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM Okay -

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

m: Dwight Smith [mailto:dwight.sm...@genesyslab.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 11:10 AM To: 'user@cassandra.apache.org' Subject: RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM >From the yamls .143 initial_token: 0 .145 initial_token: 5671372782015641057722910123862

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM Did you alternate your tokens? I may be off base - but if not then that's why you might be seeing cross-dc request. -Tycen From: Dwight Smith [mailto:dwight.sm...@genesyslab.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 10:30 AM

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

Slight correction - replication factor is 3. Will obtain nodetool ring info to verify tokens. From: Dwight Smith [mailto:dwight.sm...@genesyslab.com] Sent: Wednesday, March 20, 2013 10:30 AM To: user@cassandra.apache.org Subject: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM Hi I have 2

RE: Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM Hi I have 2 data centers - with 3 nodes in each DC - version 1.1.6 - replication factor 2 - topology properties: # Cassandra Node IP=Data Center:Rack xx.yy.zz.143=AZ1:RAC1 xx.yy.zz.145=AZ1:RAC1 xx.yy.zz.146=AZ1:RAC1 xx.yy.zz.147=AZ2:RAC2 xx.yy.zz.148=AZ2:RAC2 xx.yy.z

Question regarding multi datacenter and LOCAL_QUORUM

LOCAL_QUORUM, my understanding was that reads/writes would process locally ( for the coordinator ) and send requests to the remaining nodes in the DC, but in the system log for 146 I observe that this is not the case, extract from the log: DEBUG [Thrift:1] 2013-03-19 00:00:53,312

Re: how to read only from local DC without LOCAL_QUORUM?

You should be able to use LOCAL_QUORUM with RF=1. Did you try it and get some error? On Mon, Feb 25, 2013 at 10:01 AM, Igor wrote: > Hello! > > We have 1.0.7 multi-DC cassandra setup with strict time limits for read > (15ms). We use RF=1 per DC and reads with CL=ONE. Data in dat

how to read only from local DC without LOCAL_QUORUM?

datacenters which breaks our time limits. I know that we can use RF:3 per DC and read with LOCAL_QUORUM to restrict reads to local DC only, but RF:3 is not acceptable for us. Can we force somehow cassandra not to lookup keys in remote CD? Thanks for your answers!

LOCAL_QUORUM vs EACH_QUORUM

the following comment in the code describes them very clearly: * LOCAL_QUORUM Returns the record with the most recent timestamp once a majority of replicas within the local datacenter have replied. * EACH_QUORUM Returns the record with the most recent timestamp once a majority of replicas

Re: Secondary Index doesn't work with LOCAL_QUORUM

odes, with RF3 > - the other is a Brisk, 3 nodes, with RF1 > We noticed that when I do a write-then-read operation on the Cassandra DC, > it fails with the following information (from cqlsh): > Unable to complete request: one or more nodes were unavailable. > - write: LOCA

Secondary Index doesn't work with LOCAL_QUORUM

nodes were unavailable. - write: LOCAL_QUORUM, successful - read: LOCAL_QUORUM, using the secondary indexed column, fail Seems it's taking a long while working on this. When I retry the same query after ~10 minutes, it succeeds actually. Any help is appreciated. Thanks, Hefeng

Re: Is LOCAL_QUORUM as strong as QUORUM?

. Also you are ok with network latency. I think there is a broader design question here and you might be able to solve it with LOCAL_QUORUM if you handled it at application or load balancing layer. Is this active/active data center? What's your actual requirements? Are these external clients tha

Re: Is LOCAL_QUORUM as strong as QUORUM?

think there is a broader design question here and you might be able to solve it with LOCAL_QUORUM if you handled it at application or load balancing layer. Is this active/active data center? What's your actual requirements? Are these external clients that can go to any data center? -- View

Re: Is LOCAL_QUORUM as strong as QUORUM?

On 6/22/2011 6:50 PM, AJ wrote: On 6/22/2011 5:56 PM, mcasandra wrote: LOCAL_QUORUM gurantees consistency in the local data center only. Other replica nodes in the same DC and other DC not part of the QUORUM will be eventually consistent. If you want to ensure consistency accross DCs you can

Re: Is LOCAL_QUORUM as strong as QUORUM?

On 6/22/2011 5:56 PM, mcasandra wrote: LOCAL_QUORUM gurantees consistency in the local data center only. Other replica nodes in the same DC and other DC not part of the QUORUM will be eventually consistent. If you want to ensure consistency accross DCs you can use EACH_QUORUM but keep in mind

Re: Is LOCAL_QUORUM as strong as QUORUM?

LOCAL_QUORUM gurantees consistency in the local data center only. Other replica nodes in the same DC and other DC not part of the QUORUM will be eventually consistent. If you want to ensure consistency accross DCs you can use EACH_QUORUM but keep in mind the latency involved assuming DCs are not

Is LOCAL_QUORUM as strong as QUORUM?

Quorum read/writes guarantees consistency. But, when a keyspace spans multiple data centers, does local quorum read/writes also guarantee consistency? I'm thinking maybe not if two data centers get partitioned. Thanks!

Re: Cassandra 0.7.4 and LOCAL_QUORUM Consistency level

rategy.getWriteResponseHandler() function in your stack >> and returns a either a DataCentreWriteResponseHandler for LOCAL_QUORUM or >> DatacenterSyncWriteResponseHandler for  EACH_QUORUM . They are DC aware. >> >> Aaron >> >> >> On 20 Apr 2011, at 13:25, Wi

Re: Cassandra 0.7.4 and LOCAL_QUORUM Consistency level

11 at 8:39 PM, aaron morton wrote: > You need to be using NTS. > > When NetworkTopologySetting is used it overrides the > AbstractReplicationStrategy.getWriteResponseHandler() function in your stack > and returns a either a DataCentreWriteResponseHa

Re: Cassandra 0.7.4 and LOCAL_QUORUM Consistency level

d returns a either a DataCentreWriteResponseHandler for LOCAL_QUORUM or > DatacenterSyncWriteResponseHandler for  EACH_QUORUM . They are DC aware. > > Aaron > > > On 20 Apr 2011, at 13:25, William Oberman wrote: > >> Good point, should have read your message (and the code) more clo

Re: Cassandra 0.7.4 and LOCAL_QUORUM Consistency level

You need to be using NTS. When NetworkTopologySetting is used it overrides the AbstractReplicationStrategy.getWriteResponseHandler() function in your stack and returns a either a DataCentreWriteResponseHandler for LOCAL_QUORUM or DatacenterSyncWriteResponseHandler for EACH_QUORUM . They are

Re: Cassandra 0.7.4 and LOCAL_QUORUM Consistency level

Good point, should have read your message (and the code) more closely! Sent from my iPhone On Apr 19, 2011, at 9:16 PM, Oleg Tsvinev wrote: > I'm puzzled because code does not even check for LOCAL_QUORUM before > throwing exception. > Indeed I did not configure NetworkTopologyStr

Re: Cassandra 0.7.4 and LOCAL_QUORUM Consistency level

I'm puzzled because code does not even check for LOCAL_QUORUM before throwing exception. Indeed I did not configure NetworkTopologyStrategy. Are you saying that it works after configuring it? On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 6:04 PM, William Oberman wrote: > I had a similar error today when I tri

Re: Cassandra 0.7.4 and LOCAL_QUORUM Consistency level

I had a similar error today when I tried using LOCAL_QUORUM without having a properly configured NetworkTopologyStrategy. QUORUM worked fine however. will On Tue, Apr 19, 2011 at 8:52 PM, Oleg Tsvinev wrote: > Earlier I've posted the same message to a hector-users list. > > Guys,

Cassandra 0.7.4 and LOCAL_QUORUM Consistency level

s (2) Cassandra source, I see that there's no check for LOCAL_QUORUM. I also see that (3) cassandra.thrift defines LOCAL_QUORUM as enum value 3 and in debugger, I see that LOCAL_QUORUM is a valid enum value. My question is, how is it possible to use LOCAL_QUORUM if Cassandra code throws excep

[SOLVED] Re: 0.7RC1 local_quorum -> TimedOutException

me I'll get it all in one email. :-) At time 15:55 I performed a write with CL = ONE, a subsequent read with CL = ONE and received correct results. Similar results occur with any read CL other than LOCAL_QUORUM. At time 15:58 I performed a write with CL = ONE, a subsequent read with CL = LOCA

Re: 0.7RC1 local_quorum -> TimedOutException

looks buggy? Thanks, -Thor On Dec 28, 2010, at 4:33 PM, Thor Carpenter wrote: Third try for good luck. Maybe this time I'll get it all in one email. :-) At time 15:55 I performed a write with CL = ONE, a subsequent read with CL = ONE and received correct results. Similar results occur with

Re: 0.7RC1 local_quorum -> TimedOutException

Turn on debug logging to see what nodes the request gets sent to, and which ones replied. [dev to BCC] On Tue, Dec 28, 2010 at 1:59 PM, Thor Carpenter wrote: > Hi All, > > I am a bit stumped.  When reading at a CL of local_quorum I get > TimedOutExceptions however when reading at

0.7RC1 local_quorum -> TimedOutException

Hi All, I am a bit stumped. When reading at a CL of local_quorum I get TimedOutExceptions however when reading at any other CL, including ALL, everything works as expected. Any write CL, including local_quorum, also works as expected. I am running a 4 node 0.7 RC1 cluster in datacenter &quo