On Mon, Jun 13, 2011 at 4:01 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikes...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 6/13/2011 2:40 PM, Bryan Fink wrote: >> >> Or if I could take a look at your mock system, maybe I could help with >> some suggestions for moving in the direction I proposed? We are >> generally trying to move toward more well-defined APIs (such as >> PBC/HTTP) and to discourage people from using distributed Erlang to >> interact with Riak. > > Are these going to expose any of the server distribution to clients using > PBC/HTTP? It just seems odd that an inherently distributed/masterless > system requires an intermediate load balancer/fail over mechanism instead of > having clients that know/learn how to round-robin and retry on their own.
We certainly have the desire to expose those features. Just a matter of priorities. I'll note that the erlang-distribution-based riak_client module being discussed in this thread does not expose any of these features (load balancing, failover) either, so nothing is "lost" by moving to the others. -Bryan _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
