Basho people will know if this is normal or not, but keep in mind that in this way you are storing three copies of the data in the same machine, where you have all the default 64 vnodes of your ring. I think riak is designed for a cluster setup.
Are you planning to run the same benchmark with more nodes ? On 25 Sep 2013 17:53, "Wagner Camarao" <wag...@crunchbase.com> wrote: > Hi, > > I'm benchmarking 2i at scale of billion records, running one physical node > locally with mostly default configs - except for LevelDB instead of > Bitcask. Up to this point (14MM records in the bucket that's being indexed) > it's still performing lookups well for my use case (read ~ 7ms using > riak-ruby-client over http). > > However, along this process I've noticed riak to go down twice. First time > (8MM records) I could just start it again and continue my benchmarking from > the point it were left, but now at the second time (14MM records) when I > started riak again, it took about 3 minutes to respond to my first request. > > What was happening during these long startup minutes, after my second > crash? > > Up to which scale have you guys been successfully using secondary indexes? > > Any other ideas given my use case / benchmarking scenario? > > Thanks, > Wagner > > _______________________________________________ > 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
