Efficiency of RIAK
denis.melnik at gmail.com
Thu Oct 25 14:55:12 EDT 2012
Sure. And the default quorum of three. But I can not believe that in this
configuration, I get a speed of more than 15 000 Put / sec. Rather, it will
be about 10 000. But I'll try, if given the opportunity. A cluster of 3 nodes
with n_val = 2 I am testing at the moment - until the rate of <10 000. Not
2012/10/25 Chris Hicks <silent_vendetta at hotmail.com>
> 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
> > the cost of organizing the cluster.
> > I was surprised by the difference in performance. I expected to order 20
> > 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
> > 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
> > cost of the required number of servers will be too big.
> > --
> > View this message in context:
> > 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...
More information about the riak-users