I agree with jonathan haddad. A traditional ACID transaction following the classic definition, isolation is necessary. Having said that, there is different levels of isolation.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Isolation_%28database_systems%29#Isolation_levels Saying the distinction is pendantic is wrong in my bias opinion. These are well established terms that have been around for over 2 decades. Just because lots of programmers don't bother to understand the distinction, doesn't make it any less important. On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 5:56 PM, Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com> wrote: > This is often a confusing topic because someone came up with the term > ACID, which lists isolation as well as atomicity, and as a result most > people assume they are independent. This is incorrect. For something to > be atomic, it actually requires isolation. > > "An operation is atomic if no intermedia states can be observed. It seems > to jump directly from the initial state to the result state." > - Concepts, Techniques, and Models of Computer Programming By Peter > Van-Roy, Seif Haridi > > > > > On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:30 PM Tyler Hobbs <ty...@datastax.com> wrote: > >> >> On Tue, Mar 3, 2015 at 2:39 PM, Jonathan Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com> >> wrote: >> >>> 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. >> >> >> That's a matter of isolation, not atomicity. Although, with a long >> enough gap between partial and full application, the distinction becomes >> somewhat pedantic, I suppose. >> >> >> -- >> Tyler Hobbs >> DataStax <http://datastax.com/> >> >
