I agree with Brian. As far as I am concerned an update of materialized view is an async operation. Therefore I don't believe that you'd get most up to date data.
Salih Gedik > On 10 Feb 2017, at 16:11, Brian Hess <brianmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > > This is not true. > > You cannot provide a ConsistencyLevel for the Materialized Views on a table > when you do a write. That is, you do not explicitly write to a Materialized > View, but implicitly write to it via the base table. There is not consistency > guarantee other than eventual between the base table and the Materialized > View. That is, the coordinator only acknowledges the write when the proper > number of replicas in the base table have acknowledged successful writing. > There is no waiting or acknowledgement for any Materialized Views on that > table. > > Therefore, while you can specify a Consistency Level on read since you are > reading directly from the Materialized View as a table, you cannot specify a > Consistency Level on wrote for the Materialized View. So, you cannot apply > the R+W>RF formula. > > ---->Brian > >> On Feb 10, 2017, at 3:17 AM, Kant Kodali <k...@peernova.com> wrote: >> >> thanks! >> >> On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 8:51 PM, Benjamin Roth <benjamin.r...@jaumo.com> >> wrote: >> >>> Yes it is >>> >>> Am 10.02.2017 00:46 schrieb "Kant Kodali" <k...@peernova.com>: >>> >>>> If reading from materialized view with a consistency level of quorum am I >>>> guaranteed to have the most recent view? other words is w + r > n >>> contract >>>> maintained for MV's as well for both reads and writes? >>>> >>>> Thanks! >>>
