One should be carefull about using ALL consistency because by doing so, you sacrify the high availability (loosing one node of the replica prevent you from writing/reading with ALL). Lots of people choose Cassandra for high availability so using ALL is kind of showstopper.
Of course there are specific cases where such level can be relevant but generally I advise people to use the couple QUORUM/QUORUM rather than ONE/ALL or ALL/ONE if they want stronger consistency than ONE/ONE. The latter combination is used for low latency when immediate consistency is not a requirement. Users rely on all the anti-entropy processses (read-repair, consistent read, scheduled repair) to make data converge. On Wed, Oct 8, 2014 at 6:27 PM, William Katsak <wkat...@cs.rutgers.edu> wrote: > Hello, > > I was wondering if anyone (Datastax?) has any usage data about consistency > levels. For example, what consistency levels are real applications using in > real production scenarios. Who is using eventual consistency (ONE-ONE) in > production vs strong consistency (QUORUM-QUORUM, ONE-ALL). Obviously it > depends on the application, but I am trying to collect some information on > this. > > I saw the talk from Christos Kalantzis (from Cassandra13 I think) about > Netflix using eventual consistency, but I was wondering if there is any > more data out there. > > Thanks in advance, > > Bill Katask > Ph.D. Student > Department of Computer Science > Rutgers University >
