Actually, that's not true either. It's technically possible for a batch to be partially applied in the current implementation, even with logged batches. "atomic" is used incorrectly here, imo, since more than 2 states can be visible, unapplied & applied.
On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 9:26 AM Michael Dykman <mdyk...@gmail.com> wrote: > I have a minor complaint about the documentation. On the page for Batch > Statements: > > http://www.datastax.com/documentation/cql/3.0/cql/cql_reference/batch_r.html > > It states: "In the context of a Cassandra batch operation, atomic means > that if any of the batch succeeds, all of it will." > > While the above statement may be strictly true, it is misleading. A more > accurate statement would be > > "...if any of the batch FAILS, all of it will." > > As originally written, a naive reader might assume that atomicity pivots > on success; the point of atomicity is reliable failure. > > -- > - michael dykman > - mdyk...@gmail.com > > May the Source be with you. >
