On Fri, Oct 7, 2011 at 7:23 PM, Tim Robinson <[email protected]> wrote:
> Hi Russell, > > Thanks for the response and the history (which is always the hardest part > in understanding a current state). > > Here are some thoughts/response to your write up: > > > Let me know why not, please > > I think you misread my statement here, as I said I do believe I *can* use > it. > > > [link...] give a more realistic comparison.. > > I had read that previously, however, I had not realized the history of the > client, so I didn't know that represented an apples to apples comparison. > Now I know... thanx. > > > it would be great to create a Statebox > > I just read the Satebox page you linked as an example and have a hard time > thinking I would want to use this. While automation is always nice, the > overhead is an unnecessary burden. Since Clojure provides > coordinated/transactional data structures, it's already easy *enough* to > resolve conflicts within your natural code flow without having to resort to > the rationalizing of queued values. Also, I can only speak for myself, but I > believe most people would only want this to apply in selective cases such > that a performance hit is not taken for the other 90% of data where last > write winning is just fine. > > Does that make sense to you? I could be completely off considering I only > read the 5 minute 'read-me' blurb. > It's not immediately obvious to me how STM could replace what statebox gives you. I'd be curious if anyone has some clever ideas though. > > Thanks again. > Tim > > > > At Friday, 10/07/2011 on 4:08 pm Russell Brown wrote: > > Hi Tim, > > On 7 Oct 2011, at 22:45, Tim Robinson wrote: > > > Hello, > > I have been *slowly* learning & evaluating Riak for a product I am > developing. Originally I gave Riak a whirl about 6 months back, but stopped > due to some missing features. With the recent release of 1.0 I've decided to > give it another chance. > > So here are a few kick off questions I hope you can help answer to get me > started again: > > 1. Since I am back to square one, I am looking at the clients again.... > Currently my programming language of choice is Clojure, and initially I > had been playing around with the Clj-Riak library ( > https://github.com/mmcgrana/clj-riak) which I had believed was a thin > wrapper around the standard Java protocol buffer client maintained by Basho, > however in looking at the source I notice clj-riak actually uses an > alternative client, linked here: > https://github.com/krestenkrab/riak-java-pb-client, written by some fellow > at trifork (isn't trifork Basho's primary investor?). Anyways it looks as > though this Kresten fellow has been able to improve the java client's > performance by a factor of 10. Has anyone upgraded this alternate version, > or have an opinion to its alignment with Riak 1.0? > > > So, (Dr.) Kresten's PB client was integrated into the Basho client about > 0.14. Basho fixed some minor bugs in it for our 0.14.1 release. As of now > (1.0rc1) it is one of the two bedrock APIs of the riak-java-client, although > it is somewhat smoothed over by a compatibility layer that allows you to use > either HTTP or PB with the same API. The Basho repo has fixes to Kresten's > repo, so, bottom line, if you want raw speed and can sacrifice API parity, > use the pbc.RiakClient from the 1.0rc1 release of Basho's riak-java-client, > it is basically Trifork code with some fixes. > > > Note: I'm sure I can use the new java client, > > > Let me know why not, please. > > but a 10x speed up sounds pretty appealing and I'm wondering why it's not > already a topic here. > > > Figures here (http://wiki.basho.com/Java-Client-Benchmark.html) give a > more realistic comparison, I am seeing 2.5x-4x speed up, still not to be > ignored. > > I would really like to be able to mould the riak-java-client to clojure. > Better still, it would be great to create a Statebox ( > https://github.com/mochi/statebox) like clojure client for Riak. Greg Burd > (at Basho) and I have already talked about this, and if you're interested, > collaboration would be cool. > > I'll leave your other question to someone better informed. > > Cheers > > Russell > > > 2. Are there any known plans for a Riak cloud service? I know about Joyent, > but frankly I don't like their business model and can't see using them. Just > curious if there's anything in the works. > > Note: as a preemptive answe: I'm looking for a service which is 1. more > reasonably priced, 2. has an initial free tier and 3. automates the upgrades > and the linking/start-up process... so really, I'm looking for the MongoHQ > of Riak (https://mongohq.com/pricing). > > Thanks, > Tim Robinson > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > > > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > [email protected] > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > >
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
