[hifier]

Why no to Cassandra? I don't have the reference on hand, but I believe the issues identified by aphyr have since been addressed. It is important to do your own due diligence, especially when referencing work that is more than a year or two old.

[saurik]

This is why every time I see a new Jepsen article come out my immediate reaction is actually of mild disappointment that he isn't going back and retrying Cassandra to see if it works now: by only evaluating the product enough to do an article on how bad things are, and then only evaluating fixes when he is pretty sure the authors are being dumb (redis), it turns the entire experience one into a trail of destruction rather than one of helping anyone (whether it be the database vendor or the audience) build better things. If nothing else, at least linking the article to Cassandra's own testing with Jepsen would make it live up to the feel of the database quality review site people are looking for: it also would serve to reward communities like Cassandra's that have embraced the kind of analysis and testing that Aphyr wanted.

http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/testing-apache-cassandra-wi...

[mj_langford]

My money is on: He'll happily retest Cassandra if paid to do so. He may even accept a reduced rate to test if the specific concerns mentioned before are gone without testing everything else again.

[xenadu02]

So he should work for free on your pet request?

[iamed2]

So pay him to do a Cassandra re-test

[xyzzy_plugh]

Not using a vector clock and relying on system time is a big red flag to me.

[cnlwsu]

http://www.datastax.com/dev/blog/why-cassandra-doesnt-need-v...