[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2338?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13007609#comment-13007609
]
Eric Evans commented on CASSANDRA-2338:
---------------------------------------
bq. An int doesn't capture enough information though, it's just "the first
nodes that reply" which isn't always what you want.
Right, I was using "int" to mean "arbitrary", as opposed to picking from a
fixed set (and I wasn't advocating that approach :)).
bq. IMO we should ship commonly-used levels (which probably doesn't include TWO
or THREE) but make it pluggable so people can add custom ones.
This is a much better alternative IMO.
> C* needs a LOCAL_QUORUM_PLUS_ONE_REMOTE consistency level
> ---------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-2338
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-2338
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: New Feature
> Reporter: Matthew F. Dennis
> Priority: Minor
>
> for cases where people want to run C* across multiple DCs for disaster
> recovery et cetera where normal operations only happen in the first DC (e.g.
> no writes/reads happen in the remove DC under normal operation) neither
> LOCAL_QUORUM or EACH_QUORUM really suffices.
> Consider the case with RF of DC1:3 DC2:2
> LOCAL_QUORUM doesn't provide any guarantee that data is in the remote DC.
> EACH_QUORUM requires that both nodes in the remote DC are up.
> It would be useful in some situations to be able to specify a LOCAL_QUORUM
> (for local consistency) + "at least one remote" for durability/disaster
> proofing.
--
This message is automatically generated by JIRA.
For more information on JIRA, see: http://www.atlassian.com/software/jira
