[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6106?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13977322#comment-13977322
]
Benedict commented on CASSANDRA-6106:
-------------------------------------
In case it helps at all, I've commented it heavily and simplified the logic
quite a bit, by removing the test on "time elapsed to grab the realtime
offset", as the effect will be pretty minimal even if it gets a temporarily
whack value. It really isn't actually super complicated, but it was a bit ugly
to read and non-obvious without comments.
It's worth noting that having a monotonically increasing time source is
probably a good thing in and of itself, which this also provides.
I've rebased and pushed -f
> Provide timestamp with true microsecond resolution
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-6106
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6106
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Components: Core
> Environment: DSE Cassandra 3.1, but also HEAD
> Reporter: Christopher Smith
> Assignee: Benedict
> Priority: Minor
> Labels: timestamps
> Fix For: 2.1 beta2
>
> Attachments: microtimstamp.patch, microtimstamp_random.patch,
> microtimstamp_random_rev2.patch
>
>
> I noticed this blog post: http://aphyr.com/posts/294-call-me-maybe-cassandra
> mentioned issues with millisecond rounding in timestamps and was able to
> reproduce the issue. If I specify a timestamp in a mutating query, I get
> microsecond precision, but if I don't, I get timestamps rounded to the
> nearest millisecond, at least for my first query on a given connection, which
> substantially increases the possibilities of collision.
> I believe I found the offending code, though I am by no means sure this is
> comprehensive. I think we probably need a fairly comprehensive replacement of
> all uses of System.currentTimeMillis() with System.nanoTime().
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
