Riak Adoption - What can we do better?
mark at basho.com
Wed Apr 25 15:36:45 EDT 2012
On Mon, Apr 23, 2012 at 10:33 AM, Mark Phillips <mark at basho.com> wrote:
> Update: I'm working on rolling this thread into a blog post with a summary
> of all these suggestions and what we're doing to address them in the short
> and long term. This will be out today with any luck.
> Thanks for this. Never have I been so excited by people pointing out our
> shortcomings. :)
As promised, here's the blog post:
It's a bit longwinded but I had no choice. There was a lot to cover.
Back to work. :)
> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 2:25 PM, Les Mikesell <lesmikesell at gmail.com>wrote:
>> On Sat, Apr 21, 2012 at 12:55 PM, Gideon de Kok <gideondk at me.com> wrote:
>> > Op zaterdag 21 april 2012, om 19:50 heeft Les Mikesell het volgende
>> > geschreven:
>> > Is there 'something like redis' that doesn't introduce a single point
>> > of failure? And a completely different set of administrative
>> > concepts?
>> > A different, Riak only, approach is to safe the sorted keys in a Riak
>> > object:
>> > - You could have a sorted list of keys in a array in a user object for
>> > instance.
>> That seems to assume that a single client has all the keys at once.
>> What if your clients and the data sources are distributed as well?
>> And if that could work reliably from a set of clients, why can't the
>> server side do it?
>> Les Mikesell
>> lesmikesell at gmail.com
>> riak-users mailing list
>> riak-users at lists.basho.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the riak-users