What will be the latency for the zk based atomic increase?
On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 8:22 PM, Chris Goffinet <goffi...@digg.com> wrote: > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-704 > http://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-721 > We have our own internal codebase of Cassandra at Digg. But we are using > those above patches until we have the vector clock work cleaned up, that > patch will also goto jira. Most likely the vector clock work will go into > 0.7, but since we run 0.6 and built it for that version, we will share that > patch too. > -Chris > On Apr 6, 2010, at 10:17 AM, S Ahmed wrote: > > Chris, > When you so patch, does that mean for Cassandra or your own internal > codebase? > Sounds interesting thanks! > > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 12:54 PM, Chris Goffinet <goffi...@digg.com> wrote: >> >> That's not true. We have been using the Zookeper work we posted on jira. >> That's what we are using internally and have been for months. We are now >> just wrapping up our vector clocks + distributed counter patch so we can >> begin transitioning away from the Zookeeper approach because there are >> problems with it long-term. >> >> -Chris >> >> On Apr 6, 2010, at 9:50 AM, Ryan King wrote: >> >> > They don't use cassandra for it yet. >> > >> > -ryan >> > >> > On Tue, Apr 6, 2010 at 9:00 AM, S Ahmed <sahmed1...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >> From what I read in another thread, Cassandra isn't used for isn't >> >> 'ideal' >> >> for keeping track of counts. >> >> For example, I would undertand this to mean keeping track of which >> >> stories >> >> were dugg. >> >> If this is true, how would a site like digg keep track of the 'dugg' >> >> counter? >> >> Also, I am assuming with eventual consistancy the number *may* not be >> >> 100% >> >> accurate. If you wanted it to be accurate, would you just use the >> >> Quorom >> >> flag? (I believe quorom is to ensure all writes are written to disk) >> > > >
