[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10261?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=14737419#comment-14737419
]
Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-10261:
----------------------------------------------
bq. The term Shadowable is clearer to me and you already added isShadowedBy()
I'm good with that. I'll leave some time to make sure nobody wants to bikeshed
further, but I'll switch after that.
> Materialized Views Timestamp issues
> -----------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-10261
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-10261
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Reporter: T Jake Luciani
> Assignee: T Jake Luciani
> Fix For: 3.0.0 rc1
>
>
> As [~thobbs]
> [mentioned|https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9664?focusedCommentId=14724150&page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel#comment-14724150]
> in CASSANDRA-9664 there are issues dealing with updates to individual cells
> which can mask data from the base table in the view when trying to filter
> data correctly in the view.
> Unfortunately, this same issue exists for all MV tables with regular columns.
> In the earlier versions of MV we did have a fix for this which I now can see
> is ineffective for all situations.
> I've pushed some unit tests to show the issue (similar to tylers) and a fix.
> The idea is we keep the base table's timestamps per cell as it so we can
> *always* tell (per replica) which version of the record is the latest. Since
> the base table *always* writes the entire record to the view (part of our
> earlier partial fix) we can ensure the view record contains *at least* views
> primary key timestamp.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
