On 10/07/2011 04:23 PM, Tim Robinson wrote:
I just read the Satebox page you linked as an example and have a hard
time thinking I would want to use this. While automation is always nice,
the overhead is an unnecessary burden. Since Clojure provides
coordinated/transactional data structures, it's already easy *enough* to
resolve conflicts within your natural code flow without having to resort
to the rationalizing of queued values. Also, I can only speak for
myself, but I believe most people would only want this to apply in
selective cases such that a performance hit is not taken for the other
90% of data where last write winning is just fine.
Does that make sense to you? I could be completely off considering I
only read the 5 minute 'read-me' blurb.
Do you ever plan to have more than one clojure runtime modify the same
object? For that matter, do you ever plan to restore a node from a
backup or failure? That's where statebox comes into play.
--Kyle
_______________________________________________
riak-users mailing list
riak-users@lists.basho.com
http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
