Also one more question, what exactly is the context object? how big it is? is that something like vclock ? or a encoded full object(which might be really big if sending background)
On 2014年3月5日 at 上午1:31:23, Russell Brown ([email protected]) wrote: > And you only need to send the context object if you’re removing things, so if > you can partition > your work between adds and removes, you can have more efficient adds. > > On 4 Mar 2014, at 16:27, Sam Elliott wrote: > > > Yes, batch your updates, it'll be much more efficient that way. > > > > Do not try to decode the `context` object. Use it as an opaque value, as > > the data it holds > could change without warning. > > > > Sam > > > > -- > > Sam Elliott > > Engineer > > [email protected] > > -- > > > > > > On Tuesday, 4 March 2014 at 10:22AM, EmiNarcissus wrote: > > > >> > >> > >> Hi Sean, > >> > >> > >> > >> Thanks very much, that’s very helpful. Anyways, I’ve noticed in update_dt > >> function > they are preferred to apply a context dict, which in the mail list described > as a encoded > version of original object(dict,set, so to say on a single update action, > each time a > new record is being added/removed it will apply the full original object to > the server?), > so for frequently operations, how much performance difference is between > batch/single > actions? > >> > >> > >> > >> I’m only thinking about the possibilities on large dataset, but really in > >> fact the > dataset I’m planning to use at most contains 1-2k records is already big > enough. currently > I’m working on a project which using Riak Link to hold the identical > items,also need to > update the object data itself a lot(inside have a few counters(but indeed > currently > is just a number,didn’t put it into a separated counter yet), so is very > non-efficient > to update when new record is being inserted, don’t know if CRDT will provide > more efficiency > on that. > >> > >> > >> On 2014年3月4日 at 下午11:12:03, Sam Elliott ([email protected] > >> (mailto:[email protected])) > wrote: > >>> To answer another thing brought up in your message: > >>> > >>> When you say "big enough" set sizes of 10k, be very careful. Riak Data > >>> Types should > not > >>> be larger than you would make a normal Riak Object. There's more guidance > >>> in this thread: > >>> http://lists.basho.com/pipermail/riak-users_lists.basho.com/2014-February/014722.html > >>> > >>> > >>> Sam > >>> > >>> -- > >>> Sam Elliott > >>> Engineer > >>> [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > >>> -- > >>> > >>> > >>> On Tuesday, 4 March 2014 at 10:02AM, Sean Cribbs wrote: > >>> > >>>> Hi Tim, > >>>> > >>>> We punted on sub-type queries for 2.0. We intend to address them in 2.1, > >>>> so yes you > must > >>> fetch the entire set or map in order to find out things like membership > >>> and cardinality. > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> On Tue, Mar 4, 2014 at 8:01 AM, EmiNarcissus > >>> wrote: > >>>>> Hi, > >>>>> > >>>>> I’m now porting the riak 2.0 driver for twisted, it works beautifully > >>>>> now with what > >>> Yokozuna provides, also have a great back-port ability,really appreciate > >>> everything > >>> what this team have brought us XD. But because it still in lacks of > >>> document, I must > read > >>> the implementation both from ruby and riakc-erl repo to get it > >>> started(erlang is > okay > >>> for me, but I’m not quite familiar with ruby,sadly looks like only ruby’s > >>> client implementation > >>> is throughly right now). > >>>>> > >>>>> So here is my question on the datatype implementation on CRDT system. > >>>>> > >>>>> From the code I can tell , fetch_dt/update_dt/modify_dt is what have > >>>>> been exposed > >>> from the pbc interface. Now I’m more focused on Set object, so each time > >>> client will > fetch > >>> the whole set(fetch_dt) from the server and build the set on the local > >>> end, and maintain > >>> a add/remove operation list to send to the server when user does a > >>> update/add/remove > >>> action. > >>>>> > >>>>> But I’m a little bit confused here, like what redis provides, a set > >>>>> have a ismember > function > >>> is being done on the server instead of fetch/test manner. Does this > >>> available for > Riak > >>> 2.0 Set datatype(just like what Riak1.4 Counter object provided, it will > >>> do the operation > >>> on the server side,MISMEMBER a b, it will either return True/False). > >>> Currently I > only > >>> can see add/update/delete operation on pbc proto file, and don’t have > >>> something > alike, > >>> is that in a Todo list ? or will not implement at all(I will reconsider > >>> how the data should > >>> be structured if so). This feature will be really helpful when the > >>> dataset is big enough(like > >>> more than 10k values in it.) > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> Best, > >>>>> Tim Lee > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> > >>>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>>> riak-users mailing list > >>>>> [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > >>>>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> -- > >>>> Sean Cribbs > >>>> Software Engineer > >>>> Basho Technologies, Inc. > >>>> http://basho.com/ > >>>> > >>>> > >>>> _______________________________________________ > >>>> riak-users mailing list > >>>> [email protected] (mailto:[email protected]) > >>>> http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com > >>> > >> > >> @basho.com>@me.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
