Sure. And the default quorum of three. But I can not believe that in this configuration, I get a speed of more than 15 000 Put / sec. Rather, it will be about 10 000. But I'll try, if given the opportunity. A cluster of 3 nodes with n_val = 2 I am testing at the moment - until the rate of <10 000. Not good...
Denis. 2012/10/25 Chris Hicks <silent_vende...@hotmail.com> > FYI the documentation for Riak recommends a 5 node cluster, minimum, for > production environments for the best utilization of the redundancy and > also, I believe, load balancing across the cluster. > > Chris. > > > Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 04:29:17 -0700 > > From: denis.mel...@gmail.com > > To: riak-users@lists.basho.com > > Subject: Re: Efficiency of RIAK > > > > RIAK does not make sense to compare with elevelDB, objective was to > assess > > the cost of organizing the cluster. > > I was surprised by the difference in performance. I expected to order 20 > 000 > > put / sec. Perhaps, RIAK configured incorrect? > > With these results, you need at least 4 servers with RIAK to replace one > > server elevelDB. RIAK positioned as a high-performance cluster, I think > it > > is contrary to the speed of one node = 6636 put/sec with a record size > of 55 > > bytes. > > > > I'm wrong? > > > > This is not idle curiosity, I hoped to use it in one of my projects. But > the > > cost of the required number of servers will be too big. > > > > > > > > > > -- > > View this message in context: > http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/Efficiency-of-RIAK-tp4025765p4025785.html > > Sent from the Riak Users mailing list archive at Nabble.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
