On Wed, Aug 13, 2014 at 12:28 PM, Wayne Schroeder < wschroe...@pinsightmedia.com> wrote:
> Knowing the price would help weigh the consequences of using them > though. I just don’t want to implement a check/write/double check solution > if it ends up being actually more expensive in total operations and time > than simply using LWT. Any thoughts in that regard? > My understanding is that LWT performance currently degrades over time as the history list is not effectively compacted away : https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7753 (Unresolved; ): "Level compaction for Paxos table" This sort of class of issue reflects the general immaturity of LWT, especially as relates to performance after sustained high volume usage. My presumption is that LWT will perform in the same order of magnitude as your check/write/double check solution, but will be slightly less error prone. Were I in your case and had a hard requirement for this behavior and to do it in Cassandra, I would performance test LWT robustly and give them a shot. =Rob
