I've tried with CL.All, but it doesn't wotk better. I still have strange values (between 4 and 10 events counted instead of 10) but know every request returns me always the same count value...
It's very strange. Any other idea ? Alain 2011/11/7 Riyad Kalla <rka...@gmail.com> > Alain, > > Try using a CL of 3 or "ALL" and see if that the problem goes away. > > Your replication factor (as I just learned) dictates how many nodes each > piece of data is replicated to; by using a RF of 3 you are saying > "replicate all my data to all my nodes" (in this case counters). > > This doesn't happen immediately, but you can *force* it to happen on write > by specifying a CL of "ALL". If you specify "1" then your counter value is > written to one member of the ring, then your command returns. > > If you keep querying you will bounce around your ring, reading the values > from the different nodes until a future date at *which point* all the > values will likely agree. > > If you keep all your code you have now exactly the same, just change the > code at the end where you read the counter value back, to keep reading the > counter value back every second for 60 seconds and see if all the values > eventually match up -- they should (as the counter value is replicated to > all the nodes and their old values discarded). > > -R > > > On Mon, Nov 7, 2011 at 8:15 AM, Alain RODRIGUEZ <arodr...@gmail.com>wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> I trying to switch from a RF = 1 to a RF = 3, but I get wrong values from >> counters when doing so... >> >> I got a CF that contains many counters of some events. When I'm at RF = 1 >> and simulate 10 events, they are well counted. >> However, when I switch to a RF = 3, my counter show a wrong value that >> sometimes change when requested twice (it can return 7, then 5 instead of >> 10 all the time). >> >> I first thought that it was a problem of CL because I seem to remember >> that I read once that I had to use CL.One for reads and writes with >> counters. So I tried with CL.One, without success... >> >> What am I doing wrong ? Is that some precaution to take when replicating >> counters ? >> >> Alain >> > >
