Vladimir, Deletes are generally effectuated when doing "garbage collect", and such are triggered by adding data. So eventually when you add more data the old items will not be copied into merged files.
This generally applies for log-structured stores like Bitcask, LevelDB and HanoiDB. Even if the backends would have a specific handle to pull to do a "full cleanup", right now Riak doesn't have a way to invoke that from the front end. If you really need it, we could maybe conjure up some script that you can run with a node down. But that would have to run in off-line mode. Kresten Trifork On Sep 13, 2012, at 12:01 PM, Vladimir Shapovalov <shapova...@gmail.com<mailto:shapova...@gmail.com>> wrote: Hi again, I noticed, that levelDB directory is not empty even after deleting all keys in whole cluster. You mentioned that physical deletion is kind of delayed. Do you know the logic for how long it's delayed? I'm wondering, because I've deleted all keys yesterday and still have about 3 Gig in levelDB directory. On every node. The same thing with index directory (merge_index). Is it possible to delete keys in real? Or do I have just some configuration issues? We've 3 node ver.1.2. Thanks in advance! Vladimir On Wed, Sep 12, 2012 at 11:48 AM, Vladimir Shapovalov <shapova...@gmail.com<mailto:shapova...@gmail.com>> wrote: Thank you guys for the explanations! I use levelDB cause of search and also can't let keys expire due to application logic. Then I'll implement postponed delete or something like this. Cheers Vladimir On Tue, Sep 11, 2012 at 1:55 PM, Kresten Krab Thorup <k...@trifork.com<mailto:k...@trifork.com>> wrote: Hi Vladimir, Yes, deleting an object is actually more expensive than just marking it deleted. What happens is that Riak will delete it in two steps, first it writes a tombstone record for the key, and then some time later it does the real delete. When you do a delete, riak will return success as soon as it has saved the tombstone record. It then installs a timer and runs a "real delete" later. Thus, if you delete *a lot* of objects, then you will have a bunch of pending "real deletes". If you can let them expire that would be the most efficient way to get rid of them. Bitcask and HanoiDB supports expiry. Kresten On Sep 11, 2012, at 12:08 PM, Vladimir Shapovalov <shapova...@gmail.com<mailto:shapova...@gmail.com><mailto:shapova...@gmail.com<mailto:shapova...@gmail.com>>> wrote: HI all, Is deleting a key more expensive operation then just marking it as deleted? I noticed that delete a bunch of keys is quite expensive. All CPUs are fully utilized. I can imagine that I can mark the key first and delete them some time later, e.q. not in rush hours. What is actually the best way from your point of view to delete a key/keys? Thanks in advance! Vladimir _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com<mailto:riak-users@lists.basho.com><mailto:riak-users@lists.basho.com<mailto:riak-users@lists.basho.com>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com Mobile: + 45 2343 4626<tel:%2B%2045%202343%204626> | Skype: krestenkrabthorup | Twitter: @drkrab Trifork A/S | Margrethepladsen 4 | DK- 8000 Aarhus C | Phone : +45 8732 8787<tel:%2B45%208732%208787> | www.trifork.com<http://www.trifork.com/><http://www.trifork.com<http://www.trifork.com/>> Mobile: + 45 2343 4626 | Skype: krestenkrabthorup | Twitter: @drkrab Trifork A/S | Margrethepladsen 4 | DK- 8000 Aarhus C | Phone : +45 8732 8787 | www.trifork.com<http://www.trifork.com> _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
