[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7919?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14132537#comment-14132537
]
Benedict commented on CASSANDRA-7919:
-------------------------------------
Are they really used that widely in use cases that aren't server generated?
Also, they're generated considerably less frequently than we will be generating
them if we switch to all updates requiring them, so the attack vector increases.
For RAMP transactions, I'm pretty sure the conflict becomes more dangerous as
well. It's a while since I thought about them, but I remember reaching the
conclusion that collisions would have more severe consequences.
Either way, I still think they're a a very bad idea based on my concerns about
storage implications.
> Change timestamp representation to timeuuid
> -------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-7919
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7919
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: T Jake Luciani
> Priority: Minor
> Fix For: 3.0
>
>
> In order to overcome some of the issues with timestamps (CASSANDRA-6123) we
> need to migrate to a better timestamp representation for cells.
> Since drivers already support timeuuid it makes sense to migrate to this
> internally (see CASSANDRA-7056)
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
