> >> Does this mean there is still an intention to support storing larger > >> values in Riak in the future? > > > > Or is this something the client libraries should implement? > > You could certainly implement the necessary chunking and such in client > libraries. However, it's a pretty big set of functionality and getting it to > work right with in partitioned circumstances (i.e. with > siblings) can be a challenge. As such, I don't expect that to be part of the > standard client libraries anytime soon. >
I think this pretty much kills why I started playing with riak in the first place; local version of S3. To me it seems that this is turning into another simple database, for which there are way too many right now. I had wrote my own storage engine prior to finding riak which basically stored files and made sure it was replicated to x additional nodes (as well as s3) and the index was stored in a replicated mysql database. It was my hope that this would be the replacement for that. So, I guess I'm saying that, in my opinion, this project is going in a direction that no longer really supports my needs/goals. I think it has potential still, but it needs to find a clear direction. _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
