RE: Write Timestamps
Sorry, should have said, If you do not provide one, the CQL layer on the
server adds the timestamp, unlike thrift where the timestamp is always client
side.
Bill,
Glad 1.1.6 fixed your issue.
-Jeremiah
From: Eric Evans [eev...@acunu.com]
Sent: Thursday, October 25, 2012 4:09 PM
To: dev@cassandra.apache.org
Subject: Re: Write Timestamps
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Jeremiah Jordan
jeremiah.jor...@morningstar.com wrote:
How are you doing the write? CQL or Thrift? In thrift, the client specifies
the timestamp, and you should always be seeing that as the timestamp. In
CQL, the CQL layer on the server adds the timestamp.
For the record, you can supply a timestamp with CQL, same as you can
with Thrift. For example:
INSERT INTO somedb.sometable (id, given, surname) VALUES ('pgriffith',
'Peter', 'Griffith') USING TIMESTAMP 42;
--
Eric Evans
Acunu | http://www.acunu.com | @acunu
Re: Write Timestamps
I was using Thrift...I discovered it while debugging a replica placement scheme. I originally thought that my code was at fault, but then tried it with the regular NetworkTopologyStrategy and saw the same thing. However, I have now tried with 1.1.6 and everything seems to work fine now. There must have been some bug that managed to make into the 1.1.5 release. Thanks, Bill On 10/24/2012 10:13 PM, Jeremiah Jordan wrote: How are you doing the write? CQL or Thrift? In thrift, the client specifies the timestamp, and you should always be seeing that as the timestamp. In CQL, the CQL layer on the server adds the timestamp. I am less familiar with the CQL code, maybe something screwy is going on there. 1.1.6 is out, do you see the same behavior there? -Jeremiah On Oct 24, 2012, at 3:57 PM, William Katsakwkat...@cs.rutgers.edu wrote: Here is what I am seeing on each replica node. This is after a write with consistencylevel=ALL. DEBUG [MutationStage:48] 2012-10-24 16:56:01,050 RowMutationVerbHandler.java (line 56) RowMutation(keyspace='normal', key='746573746b65793337', modifications=[ColumnFamily(data [636f6c:false:3@1351112161048000,])]) applied. Sending response to 770151@/172.16.18.112 DEBUG [MutationStage:59] 2012-10-24 16:56:02,889 RowMutationVerbHandler.java (line 56) RowMutation(keyspace='normal', key='746573746b65793337', modifications=[ColumnFamily(data [636f6c:false:3@1351112162785000,])]) applied. Sending response to 770152@/172.16.18.112 DEBUG [MutationStage:46] 2012-10-24 16:55:59,129 RowMutationVerbHandler.java (line 56) RowMutation(keyspace='normal', key='746573746b65793337', modifications=[ColumnFamily(data [636f6c:false:3@1351112159127000,])]) applied. Sending response to 770153@/172.16.18.112 Now, if I do a read of this data, I will always see a digest failure the first time. Thanks, Bill On 10/24/2012 04:09 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: Timestamps are part of the ColumnFamily objects and their Columns, contained in the RowMutation. On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:57 PM, William Katsakwkat...@cs.rutgers.edu wrote: Hello, I sent this message a few days ago, but it seems to have gotten lost (I don't see it on the archive), so I am trying again. - I am using Cassandra for some academic-type work that involves some hacking of replica placement, etc. and I am observing a strange behavior (well, strange to me). Using the stock 1.1.5 snapshot, when you do a write (even with consistencylevel = ALL), it seems that all nodes will get the data with a slightly different timestamp, and any read (even at ALL) with always have a digest failure on the first read (and subsequent reads until read repair catches up). It would make sense to me that timestamps should be distributed with the RowMutation, not set on each node independently. Is this the intended behavior? Is there a design reason for this that I should be aware of? Thanks, Bill Katsak
Re: Write Timestamps
On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 9:13 PM, Jeremiah Jordan
jeremiah.jor...@morningstar.com wrote:
How are you doing the write? CQL or Thrift? In thrift, the client specifies
the timestamp, and you should always be seeing that as the timestamp. In
CQL, the CQL layer on the server adds the timestamp.
For the record, you can supply a timestamp with CQL, same as you can
with Thrift. For example:
INSERT INTO somedb.sometable (id, given, surname) VALUES ('pgriffith',
'Peter', 'Griffith') USING TIMESTAMP 42;
--
Eric Evans
Acunu | http://www.acunu.com | @acunu
Re: Write Timestamps
Timestamps are part of the ColumnFamily objects and their Columns, contained in the RowMutation. On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:57 PM, William Katsak wkat...@cs.rutgers.edu wrote: Hello, I sent this message a few days ago, but it seems to have gotten lost (I don't see it on the archive), so I am trying again. - I am using Cassandra for some academic-type work that involves some hacking of replica placement, etc. and I am observing a strange behavior (well, strange to me). Using the stock 1.1.5 snapshot, when you do a write (even with consistencylevel = ALL), it seems that all nodes will get the data with a slightly different timestamp, and any read (even at ALL) with always have a digest failure on the first read (and subsequent reads until read repair catches up). It would make sense to me that timestamps should be distributed with the RowMutation, not set on each node independently. Is this the intended behavior? Is there a design reason for this that I should be aware of? Thanks, Bill Katsak -- Jonathan Ellis Project Chair, Apache Cassandra co-founder of DataStax, the source for professional Cassandra support http://www.datastax.com
Re: Write Timestamps
How are you doing the write? CQL or Thrift? In thrift, the client specifies the timestamp, and you should always be seeing that as the timestamp. In CQL, the CQL layer on the server adds the timestamp. I am less familiar with the CQL code, maybe something screwy is going on there. 1.1.6 is out, do you see the same behavior there? -Jeremiah On Oct 24, 2012, at 3:57 PM, William Katsak wkat...@cs.rutgers.edu wrote: Here is what I am seeing on each replica node. This is after a write with consistencylevel=ALL. DEBUG [MutationStage:48] 2012-10-24 16:56:01,050 RowMutationVerbHandler.java (line 56) RowMutation(keyspace='normal', key='746573746b65793337', modifications=[ColumnFamily(data [636f6c:false:3@1351112161048000,])]) applied. Sending response to 770151@/172.16.18.112 DEBUG [MutationStage:59] 2012-10-24 16:56:02,889 RowMutationVerbHandler.java (line 56) RowMutation(keyspace='normal', key='746573746b65793337', modifications=[ColumnFamily(data [636f6c:false:3@1351112162785000,])]) applied. Sending response to 770152@/172.16.18.112 DEBUG [MutationStage:46] 2012-10-24 16:55:59,129 RowMutationVerbHandler.java (line 56) RowMutation(keyspace='normal', key='746573746b65793337', modifications=[ColumnFamily(data [636f6c:false:3@1351112159127000,])]) applied. Sending response to 770153@/172.16.18.112 Now, if I do a read of this data, I will always see a digest failure the first time. Thanks, Bill On 10/24/2012 04:09 PM, Jonathan Ellis wrote: Timestamps are part of the ColumnFamily objects and their Columns, contained in the RowMutation. On Wed, Oct 24, 2012 at 2:57 PM, William Katsakwkat...@cs.rutgers.edu wrote: Hello, I sent this message a few days ago, but it seems to have gotten lost (I don't see it on the archive), so I am trying again. - I am using Cassandra for some academic-type work that involves some hacking of replica placement, etc. and I am observing a strange behavior (well, strange to me). Using the stock 1.1.5 snapshot, when you do a write (even with consistencylevel = ALL), it seems that all nodes will get the data with a slightly different timestamp, and any read (even at ALL) with always have a digest failure on the first read (and subsequent reads until read repair catches up). It would make sense to me that timestamps should be distributed with the RowMutation, not set on each node independently. Is this the intended behavior? Is there a design reason for this that I should be aware of? Thanks, Bill Katsak
