Update: I'm working on rolling this thread into a blog post with a summary of all these suggestions and what we're doing to address them in the short and long term. This will be out today with any luck.
Thanks for this. Never have I been so excited by people pointing out our shortcomings. :) Mark On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikes...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Gideon de Kok <gideo...@me.com> wrote: > > Op zaterdag 21 april 2012, om 19:50 heeft Les Mikesell het volgende > > geschreven: > > > > Is there 'something like redis' that doesn't introduce a single point > > of failure? And a completely different set of administrative > > concepts? > > > > A different, Riak only, approach is to safe the sorted keys in a Riak > > object: > > - You could have a sorted list of keys in a array in a user object for > > instance. > > That seems to assume that a single client has all the keys at once. > What if your clients and the data sources are distributed as well? > And if that could work reliably from a set of clients, why can't the > server side do it? > > -- > Les Mikesell > lesmikes...@gmail.com > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > 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
