[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-336?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=12738461#action_12738461
]
Jonathan Ellis commented on CASSANDRA-336:
------------------------------------------
really?
because what can happen is, say you do an batch insert with multiple keys and
block_for=1, but the server goes down mid-write-to-commitlog. so the client
gets back a failure or a broken conn (depending on whether the client had a
direct conn to the write target) but when the server comes back up and replays
the log you get part of the update committed.
if all your writes are idempotent it doesn't matter, but if all your writes are
idempotent i don't see why you care about atomicity. :)
> Merge batchmutation types and support batched deletes
> -----------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-336
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-336
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Improvement
> Reporter: Evan Weaver
>
> I need all possible mutations to be able to be bundled into a generic
> batchMutation, and sent as one operation.
> In the absence of database constraints, this gives you all the benefits of
> transactions with none of the implementation pain. All I care about is
> whether a bundle of updates reaches the server atomically, mitigating issues
> with unreliable client VMs, and allowing the client to "roll back" a set of
> operations by merely discarding the batch.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
-
You can reply to this email to add a comment to the issue online.
