On Jun 20, 2011, at 8:50 AM, Ted Dunning wrote: > Lazy increment on read causes the read to be expensive. That might be a win > if the work load has lots of data that is never read. > > This could be a good idea on average because my impression is that increment > is usually used for metric sorts of data which are often only read in detail > in diagnostic post mortem use cases.
Just so we're clear, we'd be talking about a new operation, right? Because today's increment returns the incremented value, and some uses (like generating unique values) do require that. joe
