In 0.14, would it be reasonable for the application to write its own special tombstone marker while at the same time setting an expiry time (== now) on the object? (Assuming bitcask backend...)
On Thursday, June 16, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Andrew Thompson wrote: > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:24:28AM -0700, David Leimbach wrote: > > Riak doesn't have tombstones (as far as I know) so, you have to make sure > > all your nodes are up to do a delete. This, to me, seems like a misfeature. > > Please read my other responses in this thread, riak absolutely *does* > have tombstones. And if you don't have all the primary nodes for a key > up at the time of a delete, you'll write tombstones they just won't be > able to trigger an actual removal of the key. > > Now, that said. 0.14 has several bugs in how delete works and so the > behaviour is probably going to be unpredictable. To be perfectly honest, > I recommend avoiding deletes where possible on 0.14. As you suggested, > implementing tombstones at the application layer might be a better > strategy until the next major riak release. Unfortunately, the changes > were too extensive to be backported into the 0.14 branch. > > Andrew > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > riak-users@lists.basho.com (mailto:riak-users@lists.basho.com) > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
