Read Concern "available"
New in version 3.6.
A query with read concern "available"
returns data from the instance
with no guarantee that the data has been written to a majority of the
replica set members (i.e. may be rolled back).
For a sharded cluster,
"available"
read concern provides greater tolerance for partitions.Queries with the
"available"
read concern don't require a check to ensure that the correct shard received the query.In the event of network partitions, these queries route to the shard considered appropriate before the network partition occurred. They do not wait for consistency guarantees from servers that may be unavailable. If the shard was undergoing chunk migration, queries with
"available"
can return orphaned documents.Warning
mongos
does not guarantee that queries with read concern"available"
route to the correct shards. The shard that receives the query returns data, but this shard may not be the authoritative owner of the requested data.This can cause queries to return incorrect or unexpected results.
For unsharded collections (including collections in a standalone deployment or a replica set deployment),
"local"
and"available"
read concerns behave identically.
Regardless of the read concern level, the most recent data on a node may not reflect the most recent version of the data in the system.
Availability
Read concern "available"
is unavailable for use
with causally consistent sessions and transactions.
Example
Consider the following timeline of a write operation Write 0 to a three member replica set:
Note
For simplification, the example assumes:
All writes prior to Write 0 have been successfully replicated to all members.
Write prev is the previous write before Write 0.
No other writes have occured after Write 0.
Time | Event | Most Recent Write | Most Recent w: "majority" write |
---|---|---|---|
t 0 | Primary applies Write 0 | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write prev Secondary 2: Write prev | Primary: Write prev Secondary 1: Write prev Secondary 2: Write prev |
t 1 | Secondary 1 applies write 0 | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write 0 Secondary 2: Write prev | Primary: Write prev Secondary 1: Write prev Secondary 2: Write prev |
t 2 | Secondary 2 applies write 0 | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write 0 Secondary 2: Write 0 | Primary: Write prev Secondary 1: Write prev Secondary 2: Write prev |
t 3 | Primary is aware of successful replication to Secondary 1 and sends acknowledgement to client | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write 0 Secondary 2: Write 0 | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write prev Secondary 2: Write prev |
t 4 | Primary is aware of successful replication to Secondary 2 | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write 0 Secondary 2: Write 0 | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write prev Secondary 2: Write prev |
t 5 | Secondary 1 receives notice (through regular replication mechanism) to update its snapshot of its most recent w: "majority" write | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write 0 Secondary 2: Write 0 | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write 0 Secondary 2: Write prev |
t 6 | Secondary 2 receives notice (through regular replication mechanism) to update its snapshot of its most recent w: "majority" write | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write 0 Secondary 2: Write 0 | Primary: Write 0 Secondary 1: Write 0 Secondary 2: Write 0 |
Then, the following tables summarizes the state of the data that a read
operation with "available"
read concern would see at
time T
.
Read Target | Time T | State of Data |
---|---|---|
Primary | After t 0 | Data reflects Write 0. |
Secondary 1 | Before t 1 | Data reflects Write prev |
Secondary 1 | After t 1 | Data reflects Write 0 |
Secondary 2 | Before t 2 | Data reflects Write prev |
Secondary 2 | After t 2 | Data reflects Write 0 |