Is it a good practice to make riak a service and automatically start when the machine starts?

Gavin Huang shuminghuang at gmail.com
Wed Aug 20 01:52:59 EDT 2014


thanks for the quick reply, it make sense for me.


On Wed, Aug 20, 2014 at 1:07 PM, Jared Morrow <jared at basho.com> wrote:

> Gavin,
>
> I think if you monitor the crash and reboot and take note or flag if it
> happens often, then that could be when you investigate the node more in
> depth.  Having a node go up and down often is a sign clearly of something
> bad happening that should be investigated.  For a rare reboot/crash, having
> it start on boot and automatically come up seems like the more ops friendly
> way to treat some event that should be rare.  Due to Riak working without
> all its nodes up, we've had people who forgot to start Riak nodes and never
> noticed they were down for weeks.  This is good in that Riak can take it,
> but not very awesome when you do bring it up and the node has a lot of
> handoff work to do to catch up.
>
> -Jared
>
>
> On Tue, Aug 19, 2014 at 9:16 PM, Gavin Huang <shuminghuang at gmail.com>
> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>     We have a little uncertainty in our team about whether to have riak
>> automatically start when machine get rebooted.
>>     It do bring us some convenient if riak can start by default when
>> machine crashed for some reason, and automatically restart. but i was
>> wondering is there any case that automatically starting a problematic node
>> and join the cluster would cause some problem. do you guys have any idea?
>>
>> Thanks.
>> Gavin
>>
>>
>> _______________________________________________
>> 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/20140820/7ef9aa64/attachment.html>


More information about the riak-users mailing list