On Mon, 2011-04-25 at 03:50 -0700, Milind Parikh wrote: > I suppose the term 'silently dropped' is a matter of perspective. C > makes an explicit automated choice of latest-timestamp-wins. In > certain situations, this is not the appropriate choice.
I would still insist that using Cassandra and expecting different behavior makes the *usage* inappropriate, not Cassandra's design. You *can* fairly say that Cassandra's design limits its potential uses, but that's subtly different. As an analogy: If the engine in a Ford Focus can't tow a trailer with 20 tons of cargo, you wouldn't say, "In certain situations, the engine Ford chose for the Focus is not appropriate." No, the inappropriate thing would be choosing a Focus to tow such a load. The trade-off of not being able to tow 20 tons was intentionally made to maximize fuel-efficiency, lower cost, reduce complexity, or some other reasonable goal. In Cassandra, the decision to resolve conflicts by keeping the item with the later timestamp resulted from careful consideration of the options (especially vector clocks). And, even if the current design is the product of minimizing complexity, that is a valid design goal and not an "inappropriate choice." Cassandra may eventually gain the capability you're requesting, but please stop pretending it's a bug or sign of bad judgment. David
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part
