[
https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7123?page=com.atlassian.jira.plugin.system.issuetabpanels:comment-tabpanel&focusedCommentId=13986483#comment-13986483
]
Sylvain Lebresne commented on CASSANDRA-7123:
---------------------------------------------
Actually, saying "There is no guaranteed order for the application of
operations" kind of suggest it's random but it's not. By default all operation
are applied with the same timestamp which is both well defined and guaranteed.
So I'd prefer something longer but more precise, along the lines of "if no
timestamp is manually specified on the operations, then it is guaranteed that
all operations will apply with the same timestamp. Please note that this might
not correspond to applying operations in the order they are declared in the
BATCH. For instance, if the BATCH contains both an insertion and a deletion of
the same row, then the deletion will have priority (even if it appears before
the update/insert in the BATCH order), since deletions have priority over
writes on timestamp tie in Cassandra. You can force a particular operation
ordering by using per-operation timestamps"
> BATCH documentation should be explicit about ordering guarantees
> ----------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Key: CASSANDRA-7123
> URL: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-7123
> Project: Cassandra
> Issue Type: Task
> Components: Documentation & website
> Reporter: Tyler Hobbs
> Assignee: Tyler Hobbs
> Priority: Minor
> Attachments: 7123.txt
>
>
> In the CQL3 [batch statement
> documentation](http://cassandra.apache.org/doc/cql3/CQL.html#batchStmt) we
> don't mention that there are no ordering guarantees, which can lead to
> somewhat surprising behavior (CASSANDRA-6291).
> We should also mention that you could specify timestamps in order to achieve
> a particular ordering.
--
This message was sent by Atlassian JIRA
(v6.2#6252)
