[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9949?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=15106398#comment-15106398
]
Stefania commented on CASSANDRA-9949:
-------------------------------------
Thank you for your review [~krummas], please see [this commit|
https://github.com/stef1927/cassandra/commit/96dacb1c2f555d34753901e48fecf1f8f0190393].
I've clarified the comment best I could and added a test to show what I mean.
If it still doesn't make much sense to you, perhaps we should just change the
test and pick the reconciled timestamp. I must admit I am not 100% sure of
what's best.
I've updated {{CompactionController.getFullyExpiredSSTables()}} and added a
unit test for it.
> maxPurgeableTimestamp needs to check memtables too
> --------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-9949
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-9949
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Bug
> Components: Local Write-Read Paths
> Reporter: Jonathan Ellis
> Assignee: Stefania
> Fix For: 2.2.x, 3.0.x, 3.x
>
>
> overlapIterator/maxPurgeableTimestamp don't include the memtables, so a
> very-out-of-order write could be ignored
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.3.4#6332)
