We have some rapid fire updates (multiple updates with in few millis). I wish we had control over ntp drifts but AWS doesn't guarantee "0 drift". In North America, its minimal (<5 to 10 ms) but Europe has longer drifts. We override the timestamp only if we see current timestamp on the row is in future. Why do you think overriding timestamp is a work around? It seems like a valid reason to override timestamps.
Thanks Praveen From: Jon Haddad <jonathan.had...@gmail.com<mailto:jonathan.had...@gmail.com>> on behalf of Jon Haddad <j...@jonhaddad.com<mailto:j...@jonhaddad.com>> Reply-To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>" <user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>> Date: Monday, November 16, 2015 at 3:42 PM To: "user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>" <user@cassandra.apache.org<mailto:user@cassandra.apache.org>> Subject: Re: Overriding timestamp with light weight transactions Perhaps you should fix your clock drift issues instead of trying to use a workaround? On Nov 16, 2015, at 11:39 AM, Peddi, Praveen <pe...@amazon.com<mailto:pe...@amazon.com>> wrote: Hi, We are using Cassandra 2.0.9 and we currently have "using timestamp" clause in all our update queries. We did this to fix occasional issues with ntp drift on AWS. We recently introduced conditional update in couple of our API and we realized that I can't have "using timestamp" and "if column1=?" in the same query. com.datastax.driver.core.exceptions.InvalidQueryException: Cannot provide custom timestamp for conditional update How do I achieve this if I want to override timestamp in a query with conditional update? Also, does anyone know the reason behind not supporting "using timestamp" for conditional update? I am trying to understand the problems this would cause. Thanks Praveen
