Using Riak as cache layer

Pavel Kogan pavel.kogan at cortica.com
Mon Oct 1 09:10:57 EDT 2012


Thanks, I would check it out for my general knowledge, however I uses
Riak for other purposes and prefer to stay with same backend in whole my
infrastructure (if possible).

Pavel

On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 2:57 PM, Yuri Lukyanov <snaky at aboutecho.com> wrote:

> I suggest that you use http://www.couchbase.com/ (ex-membase)  instead
> as a cache layer. It's faster but less reliable than riak, which is ok
> for cache layer.
>
> On Mon, Oct 1, 2012 at 12:47 AM, Pavel Kogan <pavel.kogan at cortica.com>
> wrote:
> > Hi all experts,
> >
> > I want to use Riak for caching and have few questions:
> >
> > 1) How faster is using memory back-end over bitcask back-end (on SSD)?
> > 2) If throughput satisfying, is there any reason to use more than two
> nodes?
> > 3) When my memory reaches preset limit (lets say 4Gb) what is going to
> > happen
> >     on inserting the next element?
> >     a) Random element will be dropped.
> >     b) Oldest element will be dropped.
> >     c) Next element insert will fail.
> >
> > Thanks,
> >    Pavel
> >
> > _______________________________________________
> > riak-users mailing list
> > riak-users at lists.basho.com
> > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
> >
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://lists.basho.com/pipermail/riak-users_lists.basho.com/attachments/20121001/245949b3/attachment.html>


More information about the riak-users mailing list