On 11/29/2011 02:51 AM, Benoit Perroud wrote:
You may want to add 29991231 instead of appending.
Do you mean generate keys like this
md5(member_id) + yyyymmdd
instead of
md5(member_id)yyyymmdd
And use the normal 128bit token range ?
Hmm - this way there will obviously be overlaps of members ranges - then
two md5(member_id1) & md5(member_id2) end up very close so
using md5(member_id1)+yyyymmdd & md5(member_id2)+yyyymmdd will cause
range overlaps with ByteOrderedPartitioner.
Thanks
Alex
Le lundi 28 novembre 2011, Piavlo <lolitus...@gmail.com
<mailto:lolitus...@gmail.com>> a écrit :
> Anyone can help with this?
>
> Thanks
>
> On 11/24/2011 11:55 AM, Piavlo wrote:
>>
>> Hi,
>>
>> We need help with choosing correct tokens for ByteOrderedPartitioner
>> Originally the key where supposed to be member_id-yyyymmdd
>> but since we need to male rage scans on same member_id and varying
date ranges yyyymmdd
>> we decided to use ByteOrderedPartitioner, so we need that same
member will be assigned to same token range.
>> So we decided that the keys will be md5(member_id)yyyymmdd
>> Since md5 on member_id should give even distribution or member_id
across tokens.
>>
>> We have 4 nodes, and don't understand how to choose the tokens.
>> We tried the following tokens
>>
>> # ./tokengentool 4
>> token 0: 0
>> token 1: 42535295865117307932921825928971026432
>> token 2: 85070591730234615865843651857942052864
>> token 3: 127605887595351923798765477786913079296
>>
>> and appended 29991231
>>
>> so we ended up with the following tokens
>>
>> token 0: 0
>> token 1: 4253529586511730793292182592897102643229991231
>> token 2: 8507059173023461586584365185794205286429991231
>> token 3: 12760588759535192379876547778691307929629991231
>>
>> But the key end up not evenly distributed.
>>
>> So any help is appreciated.
>>
>> Thanks
>> Alex
>
>
--
sent from my Nokia 3210
