Hi John,
We are working on suggestion what you guys provided, we will send our
report shortly
Best
Dao
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 11:26 AM, John Daily wrote:
> I would like to see the results of experimenting with pr and pw as per my
> earlier message in case there is a genuine bug lurking somew
It definitely sounds as if your nodes are having problems talking to each
other, as suspected. Putting them on a single network is a significant
improvement.
The default values for pw and pr are 0; Riak by default prefers to always be
available, even if the cluster is in a degraded state. This
Dear John,
I performed the test with the following scenario :
* Old cluster of 5 nodes which nodes are not belong to the local
network. I performed test with :
- pw and pr = 0
Bucket Property :
{"props":{"name":*"bucket-name"*,"active":true,*"allow_mult":true*
,"backend":"bitcask_mult","ba
I would like to see the results of experimenting with pr and pw as per my
earlier message in case there is a genuine bug lurking somewhere, but yes,
running inside a single network will make Riak much happier.
-John
> On Feb 9, 2017, at 9:01 PM, Nguyễn Văn Nghĩa Em wrote:
>
> Hi All,
>
> The
Yes. For a number of reasons a single Riak cluster is not designed to run
over a WAN (Riak EE is specifically designed to connect two or more
separate clusters over a WAN or LAN.)
On Fri, Feb 10, 2017 at 02:40 Nguyễn Văn Nghĩa Em wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> These nodes are not in Local Area Network bec
Hi All,
These nodes are not in Local Area Network because our host provider doesn't
have a local IP. It is only our DEV environments. If there are problems
with cluster I will setup a local environment to try.
Do you think that it is the reason of our issues ?
Best Regards,
2017-02-10 3:21 GMT
The questions about your IP addresses are good ones: you’re likely to run into
more trouble when a Riak cluster is spread across multiple networks, and from a
security standpoint I would recommend against exposing Riak KV to an untrusted
network, even if its security features are enabled.
Would
Why are they public?
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 3:11 PM, Alexander Sicular wrote:
> Speaking of timings:
>
> ring_members : ['riak-node1@64.137.190.244','riak-node2@64.137.247.82',
> 'riak-node3@64.137.162.64','riak-node4@64.137.161.229',
> 'riak-node5@64.137.217.73']
>
> Are these nodes in the same
Speaking of timings:
ring_members : ['riak-node1@64.137.190.244','riak-node2@64.137.247.82',
'riak-node3@64.137.162.64','riak-node4@64.137.161.229',
'riak-node5@64.137.217.73']
Are these nodes in the same local area network?
On Thu, Feb 9, 2017 at 12:49 PM, my hue wrote:
> Dear Russel,
>
> I di
Dear Russel,
Let me try with your suggestion with an new, empty key and use modify_type
to update a single register.
And I will feedback to you on my result test.
Best regards,
Hue Tran
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 5:37 PM, Russell Brown wrote:
>
> On 7 Feb 2017, at 10:27, my hue wrote:
>
> > Dear
On 7 Feb 2017, at 10:27, my hue wrote:
> Dear Russell,
>
> Yes, I updated all registers in one go.
> And I do not try yet with updating a single register at a time.
> let me try to see. But I wonder that any affect on solving conflict at riak
> cluster
> if update all in one go?
>
Just tr
Dear Russell,
Yes, I updated all registers in one go.
And I do not try yet with updating a single register at a time.
let me try to see. But I wonder that any affect on solving conflict at
riak cluster
if update all in one go?
On Tue, Feb 7, 2017 at 5:18 PM, Russell Brown wrote:
> So in you’
So in you’re updating all those registers in one go? Out of interest, what
happens if you update a single register at a time?
On 7 Feb 2017, at 10:02, my hue wrote:
> Dear Russel,
>
> > Can you run riakc_map:to_op(Map). and show me the output of that, please?
>
> The following is output of r
Dear Russel,
> Can you run riakc_map:to_op(Map). and show me the output of that, please?
The following is output of riakc_map:to_op(Map) :
{map, {update, [{update,
{<<"updated_time_dt">>,register},{assign,<<"2017-02-06T17:22:39Z">>}},
{update,{<<"updated_by_id">>,register},
{assign,<<"accounta25
On 7 Feb 2017, at 09:34, my hue wrote:
> Dear Russell,
>
> >What operation are you performing? What is the update you perform? Do you
> >set a register value, add a register, remove a register?
>
> I used riakc_map:update to update value with map. I do the following steps :
>
> - Get FetchDa
Dear Russell,
>What operation are you performing? What is the update you perform? Do you
set a register value, add a register, remove a register?
I used riakc_map:update to update value with map. I do the following steps :
- Get FetchData map with fetch_type
- Extract key, value, context from F
On 7 Feb 2017, at 08:17, my hue wrote:
> Dear John and Russell Brown,
>
> * How fast is your turnaround time between an update and a fetch?
>
> The turnaround time between an update and a fetch about 1 second.
> During my team and I debug, we adjusted haproxy with the scenario as follow:
>
Dear John and Russell Brown,
* How fast is your turnaround time between an update and a fetch?
The turnaround time between an update and a fetch about 1 second.
During my team and I debug, we adjusted haproxy with the scenario as
follow:
Scenario 1 : round robin via 5 nodes of cluster
We meet
What operation are you performing? It looks like the map is a single level map
of last-write-wins registers. Are you updating a value? Is there a chance that
the time on the node handling the update is behind the value in the
lww-register?
Have you tried using the `modify_type` operation in ria
Originally I suspected the context which allows Riak to resolve conflicts was
not present in your data, but I see it in your map structure. Thanks for
supplying such a detailed description.
How fast is your turnaround time between an update and a fetch? Even if the
cluster is healthy it’s not i
Dear Riak Team,
I and my team used riak as database for my production with an cluster
including 5 nodes.
While production run, we meet an critical bug that is sometimes fail to
update document.
I and my colleagues performed debug and detected an issue with the scenario
as follow:
+ fetch documen
21 matches
Mail list logo
