The replication factor is the default - I haven't changed it. Would
tweaking it help?

On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 8:41 PM, Ali Akhtar <ali.rac...@gmail.com> wrote:

> Vladimir,
>
> I'm receiving a batch of messages which are out of order, and I need to
> process those messages in order.
>
> My solution is to write them to a cassandra table first, where they'll be
> ordered by their timestamp.
>
> Then read them back from that table, knowing that they'll be ordered.
>
> But for this to work, I need the data to be available immediately after I
> write it. For this, I think I need consistency = ALL.
>
> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 8:29 PM, Vladimir Yudovin <vla...@winguzone.com>
> wrote:
>
>> What is replication factor? Why not use CONSISTENCY QUORUM? It's faster
>> and safe enough.
>>
>> Best regards, Vladimir Yudovin,
>> *Winguzone <https://winguzone.com?from=list> - Cloud Cassandra Hosting*
>>
>>
>> ---- On Thu, 22 Dec 2016 10:14:14 -0500 *Ali Akhtar
>> <ali.rac...@gmail.com <ali.rac...@gmail.com>>* wrote ----
>>
>> Is it possible to provide these options per query rather than set them
>> globally?
>>
>> On Thu, Dec 22, 2016 at 7:15 AM, Voytek Jarnot <voytek.jar...@gmail.com>
>> wrote:
>>
>> cassandra.yaml has various timeouts such as read_request_timeout,
>> range_request_timeout, write_request_timeout, etc.  The driver does as well
>> (via Cluster -> Configuration -> SocketOptions -> setReadTimeoutMillis).
>>
>> Not sure if you can (or would want to) set them to "forever", but it's a
>> starting point.
>>
>> On Wed, Dec 21, 2016 at 7:10 PM, Ali Akhtar <ali.rac...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>> I have some queries which need to be processed in a consistent manner.
>> I'm setting the consistently level = ALL option on these queries.
>>
>> However, I've noticed that sometimes these queries fail because of a
>> timeout (2 seconds).
>>
>> In my use case, for certain queries, I want them to never time out and
>> block until they have been acknowledged by all nodes.
>>
>> Is that possible thru the Datastax Java driver, or another way?
>>
>>
>>
>

Reply via email to