> 
> 1)  I would rather be hit by a large cost that I can see and feel instead of 
> trying to run down hidden keys from a stale cache (reflect on chasing memory 
> corruptions...)

I think that's fair; it emphasizes the fact that if you shouldn't use it once, 
you shouldn't be using it twice! (or at least manage the list yourself and all 
that entails)

> 2)  Make a riak-configuration value to enable or disable it.  You have to 
> explicitly go turn it on to use it.   It's more of an "if you turn this on, 
> you implicitly accept the penalties and issues surrounding actually using it."
> 

A configuration variable isn't necessary, at least from the HTTP interface, you 
have to explicitly request keys. List-keys on PBC is a separate request.  
Either way you really need to explicitly call it (except in the case of 
Document::all, which is sort of a separate issue altogether).  The question is 
more how the higher-level client should behave; we're not yet prepared to 
remove it entirely from Riak.

In speaking with Kyle and some of the other committers, we've come to a new 
decision:

1) The cached key-list will be removed altogether.
2) We may introduce a console warning when you invoke list-keys, with the 
option to turn it off if you set a really verbose and annoying configuration 
option in the client. Something like 
:yes_i_really_really_want_to_list_keys_dont_warn_me_ever => true.  The warning 
would be active for Client#buckets as well as Bucket#keys.

Sean Cribbs <[email protected]>
Developer Advocate
Basho Technologies, Inc.
http://basho.com/


_______________________________________________
riak-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com

Reply via email to