On Wed, Nov 21, 2012 at 2:10 PM, Cornelius Schmale wrote:
> thanks for your excellent answer, it helped a lot for a deeper knowledge of
> riak.
>
> You are right, I am using the default-one-node development cluster. After
> decreasing the ring size to 8 as mentioned by you, everything works fine
Ring size = vnodes.
Vnodes are evenly divided between participating nodes.
Vnodes are where each of your replicas live.
@siculars
http://siculars.posterous.com
Sent from my iRotaryPhone
On Nov 21, 2012, at 14:10, "Cornelius Schmale" wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
>
> thanks for your excellent answ
8 is too small. Try 32 or the default, 64.
@siculars
http://siculars.posterous.com
Sent from my iRotaryPhone
On Nov 21, 2012, at 14:10, "Cornelius Schmale" wrote:
> Hi Bryan,
>
> thanks for your excellent answer, it helped a lot for a deeper knowledge of
> riak.
>
> You are right, I am
Hi Bryan,
thanks for your excellent answer, it helped a lot for a deeper knowledge of
riak.
You are right, I am using the default-one-node development cluster. After
decreasing the ring size to 8 as mentioned by you, everything works fine.
I will post your answer unter my question at Stackov
The issue behind this was the ring data from a previous startup. What you
have to do is delete the contents of /var/lib/riak/ring/ and then start the
service again. That's why reinstalling worked for you.
--
View this message in context:
http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/riak-failed-to-s
map reduce is currently outside my skill set. I have forwarded the question to
others on the team.
I have also asked the team if they can give me the key specifications used for
auto delete in bitcask. Maybe, just maybe, I can slide the same logic into
leveldb's compaction algorithm.
Matthew
-- Původní zpráva --
> Od: Matthew Von-Maszewski
> Datum: 22. 10. 2012
> Předmět: Re: Riak performance problems when LevelDB database grows beyond 16GB
> Jan,
>
> ...
> The next question from me is whether the drive / disk array problems are your
> only problem at this point. Th
