Or to include a "read repair in progress" header to indicate the request
should be retried?

On 15 January 2011 11:33, Neville Burnell <[email protected]> wrote:

> Dumb Question: could Riak be changed to perform read repair before
> responding, to improve consistency of response?
>
> On 15 January 2011 11:12, Sean Cribbs <[email protected]> wrote:
>
>>
>>
>> Crap, the second after I hit "send" the lightbulb goes on!  Why is that?
>>
>> The quorum _was_ met (all vnodes just migrated to the one machine) but
>> since some of them were fail-overs they didn't have the value yet (or the
>> wrong value)?  In this case a read repair happened and subsequent gets
>> worked.
>>
>>
>> Your understanding is correct. However, when I say "quorum was met" I
>> usually mean that "it had R successful replies". Minor semantic quibble.
>>
>> You are correct in saying that the wiki is misleading -- read repair
>> happens when any successful reply reaches the FSM, even if "not found" was
>> returned to the client, that is, if quorum was not met. We'll get that
>> fixed.
>>
>> I'm still dark on the second question.
>>
>>
>>> 2) Why doesn't r=1 work?
>>>
>>> In the IRC session, you claimed that r=1 would not have helped this
>>> problem.  Just like the OP, this confused me.  You then went on to say it
>>> was because of some optimization and then mentioned a "basic quorum."
>>>
>>> I took a few minutes to think about this and the only conclusion I came
>>> to is that when r=1 you will treat the first response as the final response,
>>> and in this case the notfound response will always come back first?  I'm not
>>> sure if what I just said makes sense but I would have expected r=1 to work,
>>> just like the OP.  I'll admit that I still haven't read all the wiki docs
>>> yet (but I've read Read Repair 3 times now), so I'd be happy to hear RTFM.
>>>
>>
>> A number of months ago, we ran into some issues with a cluster where "not
>> found" responses were not returning in a reasonable amount of time,
>> especially when R=1. That is, the requests took MUCH longer than a
>> SUCCESSFUL read. We determined that this occurred because one of the
>> partitions was too busy to reply, causing the request timeout to expire.  So
>> we added a special case called "basic quorum" (n_val/2 + 1) that is invoked
>> only when receiving a "not found" response from a replica.  The idea is that
>> if a simple majority of the replica partitions report "not found", it's
>> probably not there.  This way, you don't sit around waiting for the last
>> lonely partition to reply when R=1 (and your successful reads are still fast
>> because you only wait for one replica).  It's a tradeoff of availability:
>> returning a potentially incorrect response vs. appearing unavailable (timing
>> out). We chose the former.
>>
>> Hope that helps,
>>
>> Sean Cribbs <[email protected]>
>> Developer Advocate
>> Basho Technologies, Inc.
>> http://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

Reply via email to