[ 
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-6106?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13978014#comment-13978014
 ] 

Benedict commented on CASSANDRA-6106:
-------------------------------------

One last tweak: wanted to make us just a little tolerant to really whack values 
caused by GC during a measurement, but done this in a way that makes the code 
neater rather than uglier.

> 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)

Reply via email to