Hi,
64 is a bit low, I guess 128 would be better to avoid such situation.
I.
On Thu, Nov 1, 2018 at 2:26 PM Travis Kirstine <
tkirst...@firstbasesolutions.com> wrote:
> I’m running riak (v2.14) in a 5 node cluster and for some reason one of
> the nodes has higher disk usage than the other nodes
disk usage on node
I think your best bet is to do a force-replace (and then a manual repair, if
you are not using AAE) with a node that has higher capacity than your current
standby. You are correct that replacing with your standby will fail when you
run repairs and end up running out of space.
I
I think your best bet is to do a force-replace (and then a manual repair, if
you are not using AAE) with a node that has higher capacity than your current
standby. You are correct that replacing with your standby will fail when you
run repairs and end up running out of space.
I think you do NO
ravis
Kirstine
Sent: 01 November 2018 22:25
To: riak-users@lists.basho.com
Subject: High disk usage on node
I'm running riak (v2.14) in a 5 node cluster and for some reason one of the
nodes has higher disk usage than the other nodes. The problem seems to be
related to how riak distributes the
I'm running riak (v2.14) in a 5 node cluster and for some reason one of the
nodes has higher disk usage than the other nodes. The problem seems to be
related to how riak distributes the partitions, in my case I'm using the
default 64, riak has given each node 12 partition except one node that g
