On Thu, Nov 10, 2011 at 11:51, Nate Lawson <n...@root.org> wrote: >... > BTW, are there any plans for the Riak python client to use the protobuf C > library directly via ctypes? The pure python implementation of protobuf seems > a little slow.
Not that I've seen. I plan to use the HTTP interface because I can encrypt it, and I can avoid MitM attacks. That isn't possible with the protobuf interface. I think you'll need to find somebody that deploys heavy use of the protobuf interface to be interested enough to improve its speed. For the basic problem spawning this thread: I've issued a pull request for my "deprecate" branch which disables the protobuf requirement. You'll be able to install the client without needing protobuf to be installed. Of course, you'll need protobuf if you want to use that transport... but if you stick to HTTP, then you'll be fine. Note that I've sped up the Python HTTP transport. It is definitely faster (via persistent connections), but I haven't done a comparison against protobufs yet. Basho has a benchmarking tool that I might try. Cheers, -g _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
