the optimal value of the ring_creation_size
tom at intridea.com
Mon Apr 22 17:30:45 EDT 2013
Ok thanks Joe. We plan to switch to the Multi backend, so will use 512.
On Mon, Apr 22, 2013 at 5:17 PM, Joe Caswell <jcaswell at basho.com> wrote:
> There is no hard and fast rule for the "best value." The optimal value
> for your situation will need to take into account the physical resources
> available both in your starting cluster as well as your planned end-state
> cluster. If you plan to use secondary indexing, the maximum
> ring_creation_size you should consider is 512.
> There will be a separate concurrent vnode_proxy process for each vnode,
> and a process for each backend for each vnode. Each backend will need open
> file handles and RAM for caching objects. The backend configuration
> section of the docs should help plan your backed settings
> Your planning must also include failure scenarios. If any of your nodes
> crash, the surviving nodes will each start more vnodes to cover the missing
> node(s). The 10 vnodes per node recommendation is to ensure that the
> vnodes from any single failed node can be divided among enough surviving
> nodes to not leave one node handling significantly more load than the
> other, but this also is not a hard and fast rule.
> At this time changing number of partitions in the ring does require a
> complete rebuild of the cluster, we do have dynamic ring sizing on the
> product roadmap, but there is no release date set for that feature.
> Joe Caswell
> From: Tom Zeng <tom at intridea.com>
> Date: Sunday, April 21, 2013 9:38 PM
> To: <riak-users at lists.basho.com>
> Subject: the optimal value of the ring_creation_size
> I am wondering what's the best value for ring_creation_size, the default
> is 64. According to the docs 64 will work for a cluster of no more than 6
> nodes (64 /10), and ring_creation_size of 128 will allow cluster of up to
> 12 mode. I am wondering what kind of overhead of is associated with a
> large ring_creation_size. Since changing the ring_creation_size will
> result in rebuilding the cluster(destuctive), would a larger value make
> more sense and allow scaling by adding more nodes?
> Tom Zeng
> Director of Engineering
> Intridea, Inc. | www.intridea.com
> tom at intridea.com
> (o) 888.968.4332 x519
> (c) 240-643-8728
> _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list
> riak-users at lists.basho.com
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
More information about the riak-users