That really depends on what you hope to accomplish. If you want both applications to have the same performance characteristics, then go with option 1. If you want the fun of troubleshooting two applications to figure out why one application is having performance problems, go with option 2.
Is there any reason you can't use different bucket names to run a single riak cluster? --- Jeremiah Peschka - Founder, Brent Ozar Unlimited MCITP: SQL Server 2008, MVP Cloudera Certified Developer for Apache Hadoop On Sat, Jan 19, 2013 at 9:07 AM, Jimmy Ho <j...@jimmyho.com> wrote: > Hi guys, > > I knew a similar questions have been asked, but would like to find out > what are some sensible ways to deploy riak for both for multiple > applications, or even uat + prod environments. > > Let's assume I have a budget for 10 servers. > > I have two applications I wish to deploy into PROD (hence needing two > 'databases'). > > Would it make sense to, > > 1. build two clusters, 5 nodes each, for each of the app, completely > isolated. > 2. build two cluster, each host to have two instances of riak, ie > forming a 2 x 10node clusters > > Another assumption: both apps have similar resource consumption at anyone > time. > > Which would would benefit the most from riak's distributed architecture ? > > I suppose I am trying to explore ways to maximise server utilisation. > > Thanks. > > Jimmy > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > riak-users@lists.basho.com > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > >
_______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
