Re: Replication factor, LOCAL_QUORUM write consistency and materialized views

2024-05-17 Thread Gábor Auth
Hi, On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 6:18 PM Jon Haddad wrote: > I strongly suggest you don't use materialized views at all. There are > edge cases that in my opinion make them unsuitable for production, both in > terms of cluster stability as well as data integrity. > Oh, there is already an open and

Re: Replication factor, LOCAL_QUORUM write consistency and materialized views

2024-05-17 Thread Gábor Auth
Hi, On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 6:18 PM Jon Haddad wrote: > I strongly suggest you don't use materialized views at all. There are > edge cases that in my opinion make them unsuitable for production, both in > terms of cluster stability as well as data integrity. > I totally agree with you about

Re: Replication factor, LOCAL_QUORUM write consistency and materialized views

2024-05-17 Thread Jon Haddad
I strongly suggest you don't use materialized views at all. There are edge cases that in my opinion make them unsuitable for production, both in terms of cluster stability as well as data integrity. Jon On Fri, May 17, 2024 at 8:58 AM Gábor Auth wrote: > Hi, > > I know, I know, the

Replication factor, LOCAL_QUORUM write consistency and materialized views

2024-05-17 Thread Gábor Auth
Hi, I know, I know, the materialized view is experimental... :) So, I ran into a strange error. Among others, I have a very small 4-nodes cluster, with very minimal data (~100 MB at all), the keyspace's replication factor is 3, everything is works fine... except: if I restart a node, I get a lot