Hi folks,
i am experimenting with riak and have a problem with too many links in a
riak object.
If i store the object the server send 400 Bad Request. This is caused from
the link header which is too long.
As workaround i thought about storing the links inside the riak object and
fetch them in a m
What is the hard limit on links, through the REST API?
Would it be possible to have an object with say 300,000 links?
Or is this a terrible idea,
R
On 7 October 2010 13:50, Jan Metzner wrote:
> Hi folks,
>
> i am experimenting with riak and have a problem with too many links in a
> riak objec
Jan,
It is possible to do a link phase after a map phase, if your map phase outputs
lists of [bucket,key] pairs. However, the semantics of the link phase will be
to load those specified objects and follow *their* links. If you just want to
extract the links from the body of your first object
300,000 links is probably too large (at least for HTTP). At that scale, I
would consider building tree-like structure where target objects are only
linked off of the leaves of the tree.
Sean Cribbs
Developer Advocate
Basho Technologies, Inc.
http://basho.com/
On Oct 7, 2010, at 9:06 AM, Robin
Patching the java client did the job.
For anyone who is interesed in the patch here are the links:
http://github.com/jmetzner/riak-java-client/commit/61aa7df0a7314a673ca18f286a39108ad2d7
http://github.com/jmetzner/riak-java-client/commit/2910f6f39479866bb7d0e7065257f268a7af35dc
Jan
2010/10/7
Hey Seth,
We would love to have you send the patch along. When you have a moment
head over to issues.basho.com and file a new bug with the patch
attached.
Thanks for putting it together.
Mark
___
riak-users mailing list
riak-users@lists.basho.com
http
Hey Jan,
I went ahead and filed a ticket to have this code pulled into our java
client. Thanks for sending this over!
You can track it here ---> https://issues.basho.com/show_bug.cgi?id=792
Feel free to make changes or add additional information I may have missed.
Mark
Community Manager
Basho
Hi, I come up with this idea of riak schema and wanted to know if you see
some bad sides of that.
So, I have those devices, which generate logs (these are documents with
stats). Each log is tagged with timestamp.
If we store it like that, in a bucket some-device-name, retrieving data is
pretty ha
> make_ref is 6 times faster than erlang:phash2(make_ref()) which is 50%
> faster than erlang:phash2(now()).
>
> Of course, in the grand scheme of things this might not be your biggest
> bottleneck, but why hashing now() when there exsists an idiomatic make_ref()
> solution? Am I missing something?
Do you have a robust policy of accepting outside patches?
On Oct 7, 2010, at 6:47 PM, David Smith wrote:
make_ref is 6 times faster than erlang:phash2(make_ref()) which is
50%
faster than erlang:phash2(now()).
Of course, in the grand scheme of things this might not be your
biggest
bottlene
Please file an issue in bugzilla (http://issues.basho.com) with either
a patch, or a reference to a git or mercurial repo. I can't guarantee
that we'll accept every patch, but I do promise to give it a serious
review.
Thanks. :)
D.
On Fri, Oct 8, 2010 at 2:46 AM, Lev Walkin wrote:
> Do you have
11 matches
Mail list logo