Efficiency of RIAK

Chris Hicks silent_vendetta at hotmail.com
Thu Oct 25 12:00:34 EDT 2012

FYI the documentation for Riak recommends a 5 node cluster, minimum, for production environments for the best utilization of the redundancy and also, I believe, load balancing across the cluster.

> Date: Thu, 25 Oct 2012 04:29:17 -0700
> From: denis.melnik at gmail.com
> To: riak-users at lists.basho.com
> Subject: Re: Efficiency of RIAK
> RIAK does not make sense to compare with elevelDB, objective was to assess
> the cost of organizing the cluster.
> I was surprised by the difference in performance. I expected to order 20 000
> put / sec. Perhaps, RIAK configured incorrect?
> With these results, you need at least 4 servers with RIAK to replace one
> server elevelDB. RIAK positioned as a high-performance cluster, I think it
> is contrary to the speed of one node = 6636 put/sec with a record size of 55
> bytes.
> I'm wrong?
> This is not idle curiosity, I hoped to use it in one of my projects. But the
> cost of the required number of servers will be too big.
> --
> View this message in context: http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/Efficiency-of-RIAK-tp4025765p4025785.html
> Sent from the Riak Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
> _______________________________________________
> 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/20121025/0d16db7f/attachment.html>

More information about the riak-users mailing list