Another issue we've run into is that the Erlang native client allows
you to store non-binary values, which can not be accessed from the
PBC so if you're not careful or don't know better, you'll be in
for some migration if you're trying to use other clients.
The only real problem is that the PB
Hey Christopher,
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:58 AM, Christopher Rueber wrote:
> This seems like a question that would be answered in some of the docs, but I
> can't find the details...
> What kind of upper limitations are on large buckets? Millions of entries?
> Billions? Directly correlating to th
Agreed. So it therefore makes sense to start using the PBC from the outset,
allowing for future moving of the client app off any cluster node(s) it might
be residing on, as well as not being affecting by any subtle changes to the
internals of the riak_kv code base (specifically the non-PB module
To me the major concern is that if you use the native (non-PB)
interface, your application cluster and the Riak cluster become merged
into one big Erlang cluster. The number of TCP connections can start
getting out of hand, and the work put on the cluster manager starts to
become significant.
_
This seems like a question that would be answered in some of the docs, but I
can't find the details...
What kind of upper limitations are on large buckets? Millions of entries?
Billions? Directly correlating to the amount of disk space available to it?
Is there any kind of performance degradation
Hi Florian,
It looks like you may have renamed the node at some point. The
ring_membership currently reports that riak@127.0.0.1 is the only member,
however, the node itself is named riak@192.168.1.109.
Can you shutdown the node and run "riak-admin reip riak@127.0.0.1
riak@192.168.1.109"?
Once t
Mike,
It's generally good to either build a pool of connections, with at least one to
each known Riak node, or to use a software load-balancer like haproxy on the
client machine that can round-robin and health-check the connections for you.
Sean Cribbs
Developer Advocate
Basho Technologies, In
I am using a (protobuf) client library to connect to my RIAK cluster, however I
am at a loss as to how to make the right connection. All of the client examples
only specify one node to connect to. My question is, what happens if the ONE
node specified for the connection happens to be down? Am I
Additionally, the native Erlang client is more sensitive to internal
changes in Riak than any well defined protocol would be.
On Thu, Jan 20, 2011 at 9:35 PM, Ryan Maclear wrote:
> Thanks, that makes sense. I guess most of the sample code is based on the
> dev setup outlined in the Fast Track on
Thanks, that makes sense. I guess most of the sample code is based on the dev
setup outlined in the Fast Track on the wiki, which only sets up four local
nodes.
Cheers,
Ryan
On 20 Jan 2011, at 2:46 PM, Ryan Zezeski wrote:
> I think one thing to note is that by using riak_client all your data
I think one thing to note is that by using riak_client all your data will go
over the distributed socket, which I suppose could interfere with other
messages and act as a bottleneck. With PBC you can open multiple sockets as
needed and your node won't be connected to the riak cluster, which probab
Hi,
When creating an erlang client, is is better to use the riak_client module (ie.
Erlang API) or the riakc_pb_socket module (PBC)? I've seen a number of code
snippets and samples that use the erlang API and not the PBC (eg.
http://wiki.basho.com/MapReduce.html) and for some erlang code inside
Hi all,
I have problems accessing data on a solitary riak node.
I tried to connect via protocol buffers:
7> riakc_pb_socket:ping(Pid).
pong
8> riakc_pb_socket:get(Pid, <<"test">>, <<"test">>).
=ERROR REPORT 20-Jan-2011::12:02:39 ===
** Generic server <0.43.0> terminating
** Last message in
13 matches
Mail list logo
