riak_kv_memory_backend in production

Jared Morrow jared at basho.com
Thu Jul 18 13:50:31 EDT 2013


Dave,

Since Redis was designed with that use more in mind, I would guess a single
node of Redis would be faster than a single node of RIak with N=1.  If you
still want to run Riak, you'd want to lower the ring size to maybe 8 so you
weren't running 64 vnodes on a single node.   This would obviously make it
more difficult down the road to add nodes, but not impossible.

The only downside I can think of is what you already mentioned, dataloss
and availability loss if that node goes down.

-Jared




On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:32 AM, Dave Martorana <dave at flyclops.com> wrote:

> In using riak_kv_memory_backend as a replacement of sorts for Redis or
> memcached, is there any serious problem with using a single node and an
> n_val of 1? I can’t (yet) afford 5 high-RAM servers for a caching layer,
> and was looking to replace our memcached box with a Redis one. In the
> interest of reducing disparate-technology reliance, running a single-node
> riak_kv_memory_backend instance would be preferable, unless there are
> serious concerns *aside* from data loss.
>
> For us, it’s it’s still a LRU-destroy-model cache, and losing it to
> machine failure is only a minor, temporary impediment. Any reason not to
> run a single-node memory-only “cluster” as a replacement for a
> single-machine memcached or Redis instance?
>
>
> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 11:23 AM, Guido Medina <guido.medina at temetra.com>wrote:
>
>>  Forgot to mention, with N=2 should he be able to have only 4 nodes and
>> focus on RAM per node rather than 5?
>>
>> I know is not recommended but shouldn't N=2 reduce the minimum
>> recommended nodes to 4?
>>
>> Guido.
>>
>>
>> On 18/07/13 16:21, Guido Medina wrote:
>>
>> Since the data he is requiring to store is only "transient", would it
>> make sense to set N=2 for performance? Or will N=2 have the opposite effect
>> due to amount of nodes having such replica?
>>
>> Guido.
>>
>> On 18/07/13 16:15, Jared Morrow wrote:
>>
>> Kumar,
>>
>>  We have a few customers who use the memory backend.  The first example
>> I could find (with the help of our CSE team) uses the memory backend on 8
>> machines with 12gb of ram each.
>>
>>  I know you are just testing right now, but we'd suggest using 5 node
>> minimum.  With N=3 on a 3-node cluster you could be writing multiple
>> replicas to the same machine.
>>
>>  Good luck in your testing,
>> -Jared
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Thu, Jul 18, 2013 at 8:38 AM, kpandey <kumar.pandey at gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>> Are there known production installation of riak that uses
>>> riak_kv_memory_backend.  We have a need to store transient data just in
>>> memory ( never hitting persistent store). I'm testing riak on aws with 3
>>> node cluster and looks good so far.   Just wanted to find out what kind
>>> of
>>> setup people are using in production.
>>>
>>> Thanks
>>> Kumar
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> View this message in context:
>>> http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/riak-kv-memory-backend-in-production-tp4028393.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
>>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> riak-users mailing listriak-users at lists.basho.comhttp://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> riak-users mailing list
>> riak-users at lists.basho.com
>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.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/20130718/afe38f67/attachment.html>


More information about the riak-users mailing list