Let's align our definitions of system resources and namespaces. And I don't think anything is problem.
For namespaces, I meant you shouldn't overwrite Riak S2 data with your application that is directly writing your data into underlying KV. This is not Linux kernel namespaces or anything else. Just use different bucket names and keys. You can also use 'your' bucket types as S2 is currently using only default bucket type. But this may change in future as we advance S2 and you should be careful about such future changes. This is how S2 and KV works - but not officially supported by the products and that is our assumption. For system resources that are hard to define. Our intention was both workloads by S2 and your application uses network and disk bandwidth affects each other, like one's heavy traffic will affect the other's performance for sure. Locks, data files and things like that are all managed by KV process and won't (shouldn't) be broken both S2 and your application. Do they match your understanding on namespaces and system resources? On Mon, Sep 14, 2015 at 1:26 PM, mtakahashi-ivi <mtakaha...@yourinventit.com> wrote: > Thanks all, > > The problem is not only namespace but also competing system resources, > right? > Does it mean competing system resources occurs even if I separate > namespaces? > > > > > -- > View this message in context: > http://riak-users.197444.n3.nabble.com/Can-I-share-Riak-KV-between-Riak-S2-and-direct-Riak-KV-access-tp4033432p4033439.html > Sent from the Riak Users mailing list archive at Nabble.com. > > _______________________________________________ > riak-users mailing list > riak-users@lists.basho.com > http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com -- Kota UENISHI / @kuenishi Basho Japan KK _______________________________________________ riak-users mailing list riak-users@lists.basho.com http://lists.basho.com/mailman/listinfo/riak-users_lists.basho.com
