, that second vclock is now out of date too, at that moment, since the
first delete already updated the object. If that's correct, then scratch 2)
off the list.
Then the only question left is 1) siblings in map reduce - how do I access
them?
Thanks,
Gints
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 8:26 PM,
B.
>
>
> On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 4:01 AM, Gints wrote:
>
>> I did a PUT, and the vclock that came back was:
>> a85hYGBgzGDKBVIcypz/fgZJFylnMCUy5rEyNOdtOc2XBQA=
>>
>> Then I read the object back, modified it, and PUT it again, providing the
>> ol
Sure enough, I had a break; where a continue; should be in my map function
loop, which caused me to lose some siblings. Meh, all is fine now, sorry
for the spam - it's been a long day :)
On Mon, Sep 23, 2013 at 8:43 PM, Gints Gailītis wrote:
> Oh, OK, I think I just got it - the third
Sure enough, I had a break; where a continue; should be in my map reduce
loop, which caused me to lose some siblings. Meh, all is fine now, sorry for
the spam it's been a long day :)
--
View this message in context:
http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/DELETE-and-vclocks-tp4029176p4029180.htm
ing something wrong?
Thanks,
Gints
--
View this message in context:
http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/DELETE-and-vclocks-tp4029176.html
Sent from the Riak Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
___
riak-users mailing list
riak-us
affic, should the object I'm storing be sufficiently big.
Thanks,
Gints
--
View this message in context:
http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/Getting-X-Riak-Vclock-when-saving-tp4029171.html
Sent from the Riak Users mailing list archive at
tead of creating the sibling. It seems I can achieve almost the
same effect with the If-Unmodified-Since header, but can I do it with vector
clocks?
Thanks,
Gints
--
View this message in context:
http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/Vector-clocks-tp4029019.html
Sent from the Riak Users mai
ertified Developer for Apache Hadoop
>
>
> On Sun, Aug 25, 2013 at 8:23 AM, Gints wrote:
>
>> I believe they actually recommend adding all the nodes you want to add in
>> a
>> single step, instead of one by one - this way the hand-off will happen
>> only
>> o
I believe they actually recommend adding all the nodes you want to add in a
single step, instead of one by one - this way the hand-off will happen only
once, and all the objects will go to the right nodes immediately.
If you add nodes one by one, the objects will have to do multiple
transitions, s
he objects key-value)
Thanks,
Gints
On Sat, Aug 24, 2013 at 6:35 PM, Gints Gailītis wrote:
> Hi Riak users!
>
> I'm looking at the sample here:
> http://docs.basho.com/riak/latest/dev/using/2i/ and wondering if there is
> a way to use more complicated logic when using 2i inpu
If so, where can I read about this?
Thanks,
Gints
___
riak-users mailing list
riak-users@lists.basho.com
http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
11 matches
Mail list logo