[DOCS-11447] Documentation of "linearizable" read concern misstates writeConcernMajorityJournalDefault:false behavior Created: 13/Mar/18 Updated: 30/Oct/23 Resolved: 16/Mar/18 |
|
| Status: | Closed |
| Project: | Documentation |
| Component/s: | manual |
| Affects Version/s: | None |
| Fix Version/s: | Server_Docs_20231030 |
| Type: | Bug | Priority: | Critical - P2 |
| Reporter: | Andy Schwerin | Assignee: | Ravind Kumar (Inactive) |
| Resolution: | Done | Votes: | 0 |
| Labels: | None | ||
| Remaining Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Time Spent: | Not Specified | ||
| Original Estimate: | Not Specified | ||
| Participants: | |
| Days since reply: | 5 years, 47 weeks, 5 days ago |
| Story Points: | 0.1 |
| Description |
|
The documentation of linearizable read concern contains the following incorrect statement:
But this is not quite right. Rather, the last sentence of the above paragraph should read:
|
| Comments |
| Comment by Githook User [ 16/Mar/18 ] |
|
Author: {'email': 'ravind.kumar@10gen.com', 'name': 'ravind', 'username': 'rkumar-mongo'}Message: |
| Comment by Githook User [ 16/Mar/18 ] |
|
Author: {'email': 'ravind.kumar@10gen.com', 'name': 'ravind', 'username': 'rkumar-mongo'}Message: |
| Comment by Ravind Kumar (Inactive) [ 16/Mar/18 ] |
| Comment by Andy Schwerin [ 14/Mar/18 ] |
|
I'd remove the third sentence. It either is obvious (writes that start after the read completes aren't visible in the read) or isn't guaranteed (writes that start after the read starts and complete before the read completes might be visible to the read). I'd replace the second sentence with something less about the implementation and more about the risk – the query may wait for concurrently executing writes to complete before returning results. |
| Comment by Ravind Kumar (Inactive) [ 13/Mar/18 ] |
|
The second sentence just makes the waiting behavior explicit. The third sentence was suggested by John Page, to emphasize that the write operations returned wont reflect any updates made after the read, even if they have occurred by the time the read operation returns. I don't think its a bad thing to emphasize, though I suppose it should be implied given we're only talking about write ops before the read anyways. |
| Comment by Andy Schwerin [ 13/Mar/18 ] |
|
Re "writeConcernMajorityJournalDefault", you should probably check that the docs for that replica set config option are also correct. RE the suggested copy, I suggest replacing "occurred" with "completed". The second sentence sounds like an implementation detail. Is it necessary? I don't know what the third sentence is for.
|
| Comment by Ravind Kumar (Inactive) [ 13/Mar/18 ] |
|
Additional suggestion for the second sentence of the first paragraph:
|
| Comment by Ravind Kumar (Inactive) [ 13/Mar/18 ] |
|
schwerin spencer cc alyson.cabral Additionally, the first paragraph has inaccuracies regarding what write operations are returned, and can be interpreted incorrectly. Suggesting the following copy:
Any objections? |