I will do..

but one other thing:

watch Every 10.0s: sudo riak-admin status | grep put_fsm
node_put_fsm_time_mean : 2208050
node_put_fsm_time_median : 39231
node_put_fsm_time_95 : 17400382
node_put_fsm_time_99 : 50965752
node_put_fsm_time_100 : 59537762
node_put_fsm_active : 5
node_put_fsm_active_60s : 364
node_put_fsm_in_rate : 5
node_put_fsm_out_rate : 3
node_put_fsm_rejected : 0
node_put_fsm_rejected_60s : 0
node_put_fsm_rejected_total : 0

this is not changing at all.. so maybe my expectations are _wrong_?! So
I will start searching around if there is a "status" bug or I'm
looking in the wrong place... maybe there is no problem while searching
for one?! But I see that at least the app has some issues on GET and
PUT (more on PUT).. so I would like to know how fast the things are..
but "status" isn't working.. aaaaargh...

Cheers
Simon


On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 14:32:07 -0500
Matthew Von-Maszewski <[email protected]> wrote:

> An additional thought:  if increasing max_open_files does NOT help, try 
> removing +S 4:4 from the vm.args.  Typically +S setting helps leveldb, but 
> one other user mentioned that the new sorted 2i queries needed more CPU in 
> the Erlang layer.
> 
> Summary:
> - try increasing max_open_files to 170
>   - helps:  try setting sst_block_size to 32768 in app.config
>   - does not help:  try removing +S from vm.args
> 
> Matthew
> 
> On Dec 11, 2013, at 1:58 PM, Simon Effenberg <[email protected]> 
> wrote:
> 
> > Hi Matthew,
> > 
> > On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 18:38:49 +0100
> > Matthew Von-Maszewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> > 
> >> Simon,
> >> 
> >> I have plugged your various values into the attached spreadsheet.  I 
> >> assumed a vnode count to allow for one of your twelve servers to die (256 
> >> ring size / 11 servers).
> > 
> > Great, thanks!
> > 
> >> 
> >> The spreadsheet suggests you can safely raise your max_open_files from 100 
> >> to 170.  I would suggest doing this for the next server you upgrade.  If 
> >> part of your problem is file cache thrashing, you should see an 
> >> improvement.
> > 
> > I will try this out.. starting the next server in 3-4 hours.
> > 
> >> 
> >> Only if max_open_files helps, you should then consider adding 
> >> {sst_block_size, 32767} to the eleveldb portion of app.config.  This 
> >> setting, given your value sizes, would likely half the size of the 
> >> metadata held in the file cache.  It only impacts the files newly 
> >> compacted in the upgrade, and would gradually increase space in the file 
> >> cache while slowing down the file cache thrashing.
> > 
> > So I'll do this at the over-next server if the next server is fine.
> > 
> >> 
> >> What build/packaging of Riak do you use, or do you build from source?
> > 
> > Using the debian packages from the basho site..
> > 
> > I'm really wondering why the "put" performance is that bad.
> > Here are the changes which were introduced/changed only on the new
> > upgraded servers:
> > 
> > 
> > +        fsm_limit                 => 50000,
> > --- our '+P' is set to 262144 so more than 3x fsm_limit which was
> > --- stated somewhere
> > +        # after finishing the upgrade this should be switched to v1 !!!
> > +        object_format             => '__atom_v0',
> > 
> > -      '-env ERL_MAX_ETS_TABLES' => 8192,
> > +      '-env ERL_MAX_ETS_TABLES'  => 256000, # old package used 8192
> > but 1.4.2 raised it to this high number
> > +      '-env ERL_MAX_PORTS'       => 64000,
> > +      # Treat error_logger warnings as warnings
> > +      '+W'                       => 'w',
> > +      # Tweak GC to run more often
> > +      '-env ERL_FULLSWEEP_AFTER' => 0,
> > +      # Force the erlang VM to use SMP
> > +      '-smp'                     => 'enable',
> > +      #################################
> > 
> > Cheers
> > Simon
> > 
> > 
> >> 
> >> Matthew
> >> 
> >> 
> >> 
> >> On Dec 11, 2013, at 9:48 AM, Simon Effenberg <[email protected]> 
> >> wrote:
> >> 
> >>> Hi Matthew,
> >>> 
> >>> thanks for all your time and work.. see inline for answers..
> >>> 
> >>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 09:17:32 -0500
> >>> Matthew Von-Maszewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>> 
> >>>> The real Riak developers have arrived on-line for the day.  They are 
> >>>> telling me that all of your problems are likely due to the extended 
> >>>> upgrade times, and yes there is a known issue with handoff between 1.3 
> >>>> and 1.4.  They also say everything should calm down after all nodes are 
> >>>> upgraded.
> >>>> 
> >>>> I will review your system settings now and see if there is something 
> >>>> that might make the other machines upgrade quicker.  So three more 
> >>>> questions:
> >>>> 
> >>>> - what is the average size of your keys
> >>> 
> >>> bucket names are between 5 and 15 characters (only ~ 10 buckets)..
> >>> key names are normally something like 26iesj:hovh7egz
> >>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> - what is the average size of your value (data stored)
> >>> 
> >>> I have to guess.. but mean is (from Riak) 12kb but 95th percentile is
> >>> at 75kb and in theory we have a limit of 1MB (then it will be split up)
> >>> but sometimes thanks to sibblings (we have to buckets with allow_mult)
> >>> we have also some 7MB in MAX but this will be reduced again (it's a new
> >>> feature in our app which has to many parallel wrights below of 15ms).
> >>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> - in regular use, are your keys accessed randomly across their entire 
> >>>> range, or do they contain a date component which clusters older, less 
> >>>> used keys
> >>> 
> >>> normally we don't search but retrieve keys by key name.. and we have
> >>> data which is up to 6 months old and normally we access mostly
> >>> new/active/hot data and not all the old ones.. besides this we have a
> >>> job doing a 2i query every 5mins and another one doing this maybe once
> >>> an hour.. both don't work while the upgrade is ongoing (2i isn't
> >>> working).
> >>> 
> >>> Cheers
> >>> Simon
> >>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> Matthew
> >>>> 
> >>>> 
> >>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 8:43 AM, Simon Effenberg <[email protected]> 
> >>>> wrote:
> >>>> 
> >>>>> Oh and at the moment they are waiting for some handoffs and I see
> >>>>> errors in logfiles:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 2013-12-11 13:41:47.948 UTC [error]
> >>>>> <0.7157.24>@riak_core_handoff_sender:start_fold:269 hinted_handoff
> >>>>> transfer of riak_kv_vnode from '[email protected]'
> >>>>> 468137243207554840987117797979434404733540892672
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> but I remember that somebody else had this as well and if I recall
> >>>>> correctly it disappeared after the full upgrade was done.. but at the
> >>>>> moment it's hard to think about upgrading everything at once..
> >>>>> (~12hours 100% disk utilization on all 12 nodes will lead to real slow
> >>>>> puts/gets)
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> What can I do?
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Cheers
> >>>>> Simon
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> PS: transfers output:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> '[email protected]' waiting to handoff 17 partitions
> >>>>> '[email protected]' waiting to handoff 19 partitions
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> (these are the 1.4.2 nodes)
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 14:39:58 +0100
> >>>>> Simon Effenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>> 
> >>>>>> Also some side notes:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> "top" is even better on new 1.4.2 than on 1.3.1 machines.. IO
> >>>>>> utilization of disk is mostly the same (round about 33%)..
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> but
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 95th percentile of response time for get (avg over all nodes):
> >>>>>> before upgrade: 29ms
> >>>>>> after upgrade: almost the same
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 95th percentile of response time for put (avg over all nodes):
> >>>>>> before upgrade: 60ms
> >>>>>> after upgrade: 1548ms
> >>>>>>  but this is only because of 2 of 12 nodes are
> >>>>>>  on 1.4.2 and are really slow (17000ms)
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Cheers,
> >>>>>> Simon
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 13:45:56 +0100
> >>>>>> Simon Effenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Sorry I forgot the half of it..
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> seffenberg@kriak46-1:~$ free -m
> >>>>>>>           total       used       free     shared    buffers cached
> >>>>>>> Mem:         23999      23759        239          0        184      
> >>>>>>> 16183
> >>>>>>> -/+ buffers/cache:       7391      16607
> >>>>>>> Swap:            0          0          0
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> We have 12 servers..
> >>>>>>> datadir on the compacted servers (1.4.2) ~ 765 GB
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> AAE is enabled.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> I attached app.config and vm.args.
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>> Simon
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 07:33:31 -0500
> >>>>>>> Matthew Von-Maszewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Ok, I am now suspecting that your servers are either using swap 
> >>>>>>>> space (which is slow) or your leveldb file cache is thrashing 
> >>>>>>>> (opening and closing multiple files per request).
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> How many servers do you have and do you use Riak's active 
> >>>>>>>> anti-entropy feature?  I am going to plug all of this into a 
> >>>>>>>> spreadsheet.
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> Matthew Von-Maszewski
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 7:09, Simon Effenberg 
> >>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Hi Matthew
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Memory: 23999 MB
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> ring_creation_size, 256
> >>>>>>>>> max_open_files, 100
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> riak-admin status:
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> memory_total : 276001360
> >>>>>>>>> memory_processes : 191506322
> >>>>>>>>> memory_processes_used : 191439568
> >>>>>>>>> memory_system : 84495038
> >>>>>>>>> memory_atom : 686993
> >>>>>>>>> memory_atom_used : 686560
> >>>>>>>>> memory_binary : 21965352
> >>>>>>>>> memory_code : 11332732
> >>>>>>>>> memory_ets : 10823528
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Thanks for looking!
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>>>> Simon
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> On Wed, 11 Dec 2013 06:44:42 -0500
> >>>>>>>>> Matthew Von-Maszewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> I need to ask other developers as they arrive for the new day.  
> >>>>>>>>>> Does not make sense to me.
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> How many nodes do you have?  How much RAM do you have in each 
> >>>>>>>>>> node?  What are your settings for max_open_files and cache_size in 
> >>>>>>>>>> the app.config file?  Maybe this is as simple as leveldb using too 
> >>>>>>>>>> much RAM in 1.4.  The memory accounting for maz_open_files changed 
> >>>>>>>>>> in 1.4.
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> Matthew Von-Maszewski
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>> On Dec 11, 2013, at 6:28, Simon Effenberg 
> >>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Hi Matthew,
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> it took around 11hours for the first node to finish the 
> >>>>>>>>>>> compaction. The
> >>>>>>>>>>> second node is running already 12 hours and is still doing 
> >>>>>>>>>>> compaction.
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Besides that I wonder because the fsm_put time on the new 1.4.2 
> >>>>>>>>>>> host is
> >>>>>>>>>>> much higher (after the compaction) than on an old 1.3.1 (both are
> >>>>>>>>>>> running in the cluster right now and another one is doing the
> >>>>>>>>>>> compaction/upgrade while it is in the cluster but not directly
> >>>>>>>>>>> accessible because it is out of the Loadbalancer):
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1.4.2:
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_mean : 2208050
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_median : 39231
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_95 : 17400382
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_99 : 50965752
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_100 : 59537762
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_active : 5
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_active_60s : 364
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_in_rate : 5
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_out_rate : 3
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_rejected : 0
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_rejected_60s : 0
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_rejected_total : 0
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1.3.1:
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_mean : 5036
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_median : 1614
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_95 : 8789
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_99 : 38258
> >>>>>>>>>>> node_put_fsm_time_100 : 384372
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> any clue why this could/should be?
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>>>>>> Simon
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 17:21:07 +0100
> >>>>>>>>>>> Simon Effenberg <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Matthew,
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> thanks!.. that answers my questions!
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Simon
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 11:08:32 -0500
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Matthew Von-Maszewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 2i is not my expertise, so I had to discuss you concerns with 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> another Basho developer.  He says:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Between 1.3 and 1.4, the 2i query did change but not the 2i 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> on-disk format.  You must wait for all nodes to update if you 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> desire to use the new 2i query.  The 2i data will properly 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> write/update on both 1.3 and 1.4 machines during the migration.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Does that answer your question?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> And yes, you might see available disk space increase during the 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> upgrade compactions if your dataset contains numerous delete 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "tombstones".  The Riak 2.0 code includes a new feature called 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> "aggressive delete" for leveldb.  This feature is more 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> proactive in pushing delete tombstones through the levels to 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> free up disk space much more quickly (especially if you perform 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> block deletes every now and then).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthew
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 10, 2013, at 10:44 AM, Simon Effenberg 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi Matthew,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> see inline..
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 10 Dec 2013 10:38:03 -0500
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthew Von-Maszewski <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The sad truth is that you are not the first to see this 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> problem.  And yes, it has to do with your 950GB per node 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dataset.  And no, nothing to do but sit through it at this 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> time.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> While I did extensive testing around upgrade times before 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shipping 1.4, apparently there are data configurations I did 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not anticipate.  You are likely seeing a cascade where a 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shift of one file from level-1 to level-2 is causing a shift 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> of another file from level-2 to level-3, which causes a 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> level-3 file to shift to level-4, etc … then the next file 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> shifts from level-1.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The bright side of this pain is that you will end up with 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> better write throughput once all the compaction ends.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have to deal with that.. but my problem is now, if I'm doing 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> this
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> node by node it looks like 2i searches aren't possible while 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.3 and
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 1.4 nodes exists in the cluster. Is there any problem which 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> leads me to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> an 2i repair marathon or could I easily wait for some hours 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> for each
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> node until all merges are done before I upgrade the next one? 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> (2i
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> searches can fail for some time.. the APP isn't having 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> problems with
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> that but are new inserts with 2i indices processed 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> successfully or do
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> I have to do the 2i repair?)
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> /s
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> one other good think: saving disk space is one advantage ;)..
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Riak 2.0's leveldb has code to prevent/reduce compaction 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> cascades, but that is not going to help you today.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Matthew
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Dec 10, 2013, at 10:26 AM, Simon Effenberg 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> <[email protected]> wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hi @list,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I'm trying to upgrade our Riak cluster from 1.3.1 to 1.4.2 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> .. after
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> upgrading the first node (out of 12) this node seems to do 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> many merges.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the sst_* directories changes in size "rapidly" and the node 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is having
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a disk utilization of 100% all the time.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I know that there is something like that:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> "The first execution of 1.4.0 leveldb using a 1.3.x or 1.2.x 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> dataset
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> will initiate an automatic conversion that could pause the 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> startup of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> each node by 3 to 7 minutes. The leveldb data in "level #1" 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is being
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> adjusted such that "level #1" can operate as an overlapped 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> data level
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> instead of as a sorted data level. The conversion is simply 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> reduction of the number of files in "level #1" to being less 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> than eight
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> via normal compaction of data from "level #1" into "level 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> #2". This is
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> a one time conversion."
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> but it looks much more invasive than explained here or 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> doesn't have to
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> do anything with the (probably seen) merges.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Is this "normal" behavior or could I do anything about it?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> At the moment I'm stucked with the upgrade procedure because 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> this high
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> IO load would probably lead to high response times.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Also we have a lot of data (per node ~950 GB).
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Cheers
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> riak-users mailing list
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mail:     [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Web:    www.mobile.de
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Mail:     [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Web:    www.mobile.de
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> >>>>>>>>>>>> HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow
> >>>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>> riak-users mailing list
> >>>>>>>>>>>> [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>>>> Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> >>>>>>>>>>> Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> >>>>>>>>>>> Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Mail:     [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>>>> Web:    www.mobile.de
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> >>>>>>>>>>> HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> >>>>>>>>>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>>>> Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> >>>>>>>>> Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> >>>>>>>>> Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Mail:     [email protected]
> >>>>>>>>> Web:    www.mobile.de
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> >>>>>>>>> HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> >>>>>>>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> --
> >>>>>>> Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> >>>>>>> Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> >>>>>>> Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Mail:     [email protected]
> >>>>>>> Web:    www.mobile.de
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> 
> >>>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> >>>>>>> HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> >>>>>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> --
> >>>>>> Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> >>>>>> Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> >>>>>> Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Mail:     [email protected]
> >>>>>> Web:    www.mobile.de
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> 
> >>>>>> Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> >>>>>> HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> >>>>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> --
> >>>>> Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> >>>>> Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> >>>>> Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Mail:     [email protected]
> >>>>> Web:    www.mobile.de
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> 
> >>>>> Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> >>>>> HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> >>>>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow
> >>>> 
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> --
> >>> Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> >>> Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> >>> Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> >>> 
> >>> Mail:     [email protected]
> >>> Web:    www.mobile.de
> >>> 
> >>> Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> >>> 
> >>> 
> >>> Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> >>> HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> >>> Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow
> >> 
> > 
> > 
> > -- 
> > Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
> > Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
> > Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131
> > 
> > Mail:     [email protected]
> > Web:    www.mobile.de
> > 
> > Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany
> > 
> > 
> > Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
> > HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
> > Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow 
> 


-- 
Simon Effenberg | Site Ops Engineer | mobile.international GmbH
Fon:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7173
Fax:     + 49-(0)30-8109 - 7131

Mail:     [email protected]
Web:    www.mobile.de

Marktplatz 1 | 14532 Europarc Dreilinden | Germany


Geschäftsführer: Malte Krüger
HRB Nr.: 18517 P, Amtsgericht Potsdam
Sitz der Gesellschaft: Kleinmachnow 

_______________________________________________
riak-users mailing list
[email protected]
http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com

Reply via email to