I disagree with whoever said that. User information (like a profile or account) is some of the easiest to implement with eventual consistency, namely because it would be rare to be in conflict (only a single actor updating), and conflict resolution can be performed trivially without intervention or presented to the user in straightforward ways.
If you're concerned about ensuring uniqueness of user identifiers, you can go with any one of a number of workarounds like UUIDs, "Snowflake" IDs, and cryptographic hashes/tokens, or go the slow route and ensure it via strong consistency. The benefits of using Riak for this sort of data are the typical ones: high reliability and durability, global availability (if using Riak Enterprise), and simplified operations. Basically, barring problems in other components, your users will almost always be able to view and edit their profiles. On Wed, Jan 7, 2015 at 7:49 AM, xu xiut <xiut...@gmail.com> wrote: > I've heard several times now that key/value stores aren't ideal for > storing user information. Why is this true? > > Does this apply to Riak even with strong consistency in 2.0? > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > riak-users@lists.basho.com > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > > -- Sean Cribbs <s...@basho.com> Sr. Software Engineer Basho Technologies, Inc. http://basho.com/
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
