However this problem does get solved it needs to be backend agnostic and function at the riak level. -Alexander
On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 14:02, Nico Meyer <[email protected]> wrote: > Expiry time in bitcask is a global setting at the moment, not per key. But > even if it where different, this should behave exactly the same as outright > deletion (what else is expires now supposed to mean?). Hence the same > problems as David observed in the first place. > > Which makes me think, actually. Andrew, if riak only reaps the tombstone if > all primary vnodes are up, why did David see the behaviour he did? > Is it not working correctly in 0.14? Or does list key ignore the values, and > therefore the tombstone? I'm guessing the latter, which would be another > reason to avoid key listing for any real world usage. > > Cheers, > Nico > > Am 16.06.2011 19:33, schrieb Greg Nelson: > > In 0.14, would it be reasonable for the application to write its own special > tombstone marker while at the same time setting an expiry time (== now) on > the object? (Assuming bitcask backend...) > > On Thursday, June 16, 2011 at 10:24 AM, Andrew Thompson wrote: > > On Thu, Jun 16, 2011 at 09:24:28AM -0700, David Leimbach wrote: > > Riak doesn't have tombstones (as far as I know) so, you have to make sure > all your nodes are up to do a delete. This, to me, seems like a misfeature. > > Please read my other responses in this thread, riak absolutely *does* > have tombstones. And if you don't have all the primary nodes for a key > up at the time of a delete, you'll write tombstones they just won't be > able to trigger an actual removal of the key. > > Now, that said. 0.14 has several bugs in how delete works and so the > behaviour is probably going to be unpredictable. To be perfectly honest, > I recommend avoiding deletes where possible on 0.14. As you suggested, > implementing tombstones at the application layer might be a better > strategy until the next major riak release. Unfortunately, the changes > were too extensive to be backported into the 0.14 branch. > > Andrew > > _______________________________________________ > 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 > > > _______________________________________________ > 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
