I’ve had a few use cases for downgrading consistency over the years.  If you’re 
showing a customer dashboard w/ some Ad summary data, it’s great to be right, 
but showing a number that’s close is better than not being up.

> On Oct 6, 2017, at 1:32 PM, Jeff Jirsa <[email protected]> wrote:
> 
> I think it was Brandon that used to make a pretty compelling argument that 
> downgrading consistency on writes was always wrong, because if you can 
> tolerate the lower consistency, you should just use the lower consistency 
> from the start (because cassandra is still going to send the write to all 
> replicas, anyway). 
> 
> On Fri, Oct 6, 2017 at 12:51 PM, Jim Witschey <[email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:
> > Modern client drivers also have ways to “downgrade” the CL of requests, in 
> > case they fail. E.g. for the Java driver: 
> > http://docs.datastax.com/en/latest-java-driver-api/com/datastax/driver/core/policies/DowngradingConsistencyRetryPolicy.html
> >  
> > <http://docs.datastax.com/en/latest-java-driver-api/com/datastax/driver/core/policies/DowngradingConsistencyRetryPolicy.html>
> 
> Quick note from a driver dev's perspective: Mark, yours sounds like a
> bad use case for a downgrading retry policy. If your cluster has an RF
> of 2, and your app requires CL.QUORUM, a downgrading policy will, e.g.
> try at CL.QUORUM and downgrade below your required CL; or try at
> CL.ALL, then fail and downgrade to CL.QUORUM or an equivalent, which
> is what your app needs in the first place.
> 
> ---------------------------------------------------------------------
> To unsubscribe, e-mail: [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> For additional commands, e-mail: [email protected] 
> <mailto:[email protected]>
> 
> 

Reply via email to