On Fri, Mar 5, 2010 at 17:56, J Chris Anderson <[email protected]> wrote: > I don't think this is a bug. Preserving order across replicas is definitely > something that won't scale across a cluster (especially if it is > partitioned), so we wouldn't want to attempt guarantees like that at smaller > scales.
I'm not sure why you think it doesn't scale across a cluster. If you guarantee this for a single replication connection, doesn't that magically scale to all of the cluster? That is, if any message y preceded by message x came in at any of the masters, and all replication channels preserve this order, then any server that has y will be sure to have gotten x before. So I'm not sure why that implies changes at larger scale. > Of course, if you have a field you'd like to order operations on, you can > mark your documents with it and use view queries to drive the asynchronous > processing. Well, sure, but now I go from using the changes feed to having to issue a view request on every notification in the changes feed, which kind of sucks. I don't think the feed filters can do ordering, right? Cheers, Dirkjan
