Thank you! I hope to get around to testing your patches Thursday morning.
On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 4:59 PM, Jonathan Ellis <jbel...@gmail.com> wrote: > Thanks for the patch! > > Since we've had some jira notification whackiness -- I just attached a > v2 patch and commented. > > On Tue, Mar 16, 2010 at 3:43 PM, Omer van der Horst Jansen > <ome...@gmail.com> wrote: >> The ticket is here: https://issues.apache.org/jira/browse/CASSANDRA-884 >> >> I've attached a patch there that seems to fix the problem. >> >> Has anybody else seen this behavior? >> >> >>> That would be a bug, not intended behavior. Can you open a ticket? >>> >>> On Fri, Mar 12, 2010 at 11:48 AM, Omer van der Horst Jansen >>> <ome...@yahoo.com> wrote: >>> > I've noticed that both 0.5.1 and 0.6b2 return (ReplicationFactor) >>> > identical copies of the data stored in my keyspace whenever I make a >>> > call to get_range_slice or get_range_slices using >>> > ConsistencyLevel.QUORUM. >>> > >>> > So with ReplicationFactor set to 2 for my application's KeySpace I get >>> > double the number of KeySlices that I expect to get. When using >>> > ConsistencyLevel.ONE I get only one KeySlice for each row. >>> > >>> > The same routine running against the Standard1 keyspace with a >>> > ReplicationFactor of 1 returns only a single KeySlice for each row. A >>> > ReplicationFactor of three gives me three identical KeySlices when using >>> > ConsistencyLevel.QUORUM. >>> > >>> > Is this the intended behavior of get_range_slices? I remember reading in >>> > one of the Dynamo papers that applications (and not Dynamo) are required >>> > to sort out any discrepancies in the data, but in this case there aren't >>> > any discrepancies. >>> > >>> > Omer >> >
