On 17 May 2016, at 09:19, Benoit Chesneau <bchesn...@gmail.com> wrote:
> > > On Tue, May 17, 2016 at 10:15 AM Russell Brown <russell.br...@me.com> wrote: > There’ll still be the need of a version vector, yes. Any advice/contribution > on optimisations there greatly appreciated, thanks. > > maybe moving to SWC? > https://github.com/ricardobcl/ServerWideClocks I don’t think server wide clocks is the way to go for a library like riak_dt. It imposes too much in terms of the system. I also think ServerWideClocks, while very interesting and promising, have some pretty hard unanswered questions still. For riak_dt I tried not to impose a system model, so maybe every actor is a replica, or maybe there is a server, or set of servers. But this does need documenting. > > would be good in systems where you have a lot of nodes going in and out in > the topology. How do serverwideclocks help with high membership churn? > > For me a must have would be a clear documentation on how using riak_dt, what > to share with the client, how/when to merge etc... It would maybe attract > more users too. Going threw the code is quite painful :) I agree, this is something that is required. Things like when to use deferred operations and a context etc are all absent. I hope to spend some time on this soon. But yes. I will add that to the list of things that are needed to bring some love to riak_dt. Cheers Russell > > - benoit > > > On 17 May 2016, at 09:05, Sargun Dhillon <sar...@sargun.me> wrote: > > > Is the plan to keep using riak_dt_vclock? If so, I might contribute > > some optimizations for large numbers of actor entries (1000s). > > > > On Thu, Apr 28, 2016 at 12:55 AM, Russell Brown <russell.br...@me.com> > > wrote: > >> Hi, > >> Riak DT[1] is in need of some love. I know that some of you on this list > >> (Sargun, are you here? Heinz?) have expressed opinions on the work that > >> needs doing. Here is my short list, I would love to hear opinions on > >> priority, and any additions to this list: > >> > >> 1. merger smaller map branch > >> 2. deltas > >> 3. new data types (we have a range register and some and > >> Multi-Value-Register to add, any more?) > >> 4. Internal state as records or maps (but not these messy tuples) > >> 5. update to rebar3 > >> 6. update to latest erlang > >> > >> I’m pretty sure there is plenty more. Would greatly appreciate your > >> feedback. > >> > >> Many thanks > >> > >> Russell > >> > >> [1] https://github.com/basho/riak_dt/ > >> _______________________________________________ > >> 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
