This isn't really about scenarios in general, just the example you gave: On Thu, Aug 4, 2011 at 9:33 AM, Jonathan Langevin < [email protected]> wrote:
> One such scenario that I'd be interested in seeing, is a setup where you > have a Riak cluster with a specific node that is used for all reads/writes > of an application. > The idea is to ensure that the data is always online (via cluster), but > also ensure that you always have the latest version of your data (specific > single node read/write). > If this primary node goes down, then just switch the application to a new > primary node. That could occur via application logic or other solution that > exists between application and riak cluster. > Riak has no real notion of "primary" node(s), and you don't want to change that. (Though I guess the first node in the preference list for a given hash could be considered the "most primary"... but that's a bit different.) Anyway, you should be able to achieve strong consistency (read your last write) by keeping R + W > N. You shouldn't think of Riak in "master slave" terms you may be used to from your relational database of choice. http://wiki.basho.com/Tunable-CAP-Controls-in-Riak.html http://wiki.basho.com/Eventual-Consistency.html
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
