Adding CL.TWO would be easy enough. :) On Mon, Jan 17, 2011 at 12:12 PM, Peter Schuller <peter.schul...@infidyne.com> wrote: >> I think you should just tell everybody that if you want to use QUORUM you >> need RF >= 3 for it to be meaningful. >> >> No one would use QUORUM with RF < 3 except in error. > > Well, strictly speaking you could have an application designed to talk > to Cassandra at QUORUM and an operator may choose to deploy it against > an RF=2 cluster, accepting the fact that the application won't survive > a node going down. For example, maybe write's are done at QUORUM (for > durability rather than consistency) and reads at ONE. > > (I"ve been meaning to suggest it at some point btw, but consistency > and durability are different concerns. For durability purposes it > would be nice to say "require two nodes", rather than having to choose > between ONE and QUORUM.) > > -- > / Peter Schuller >
-- Jonathan Ellis Project Chair, Apache Cassandra co-founder of Riptano, the source for professional Cassandra support http://riptano.com
