Hi. Thanks for the answers. Yes, API is very nice.
Benchmark also looks good. Our concern is how much it can really handle. Can we load like 5 Tera into it... I know tikv can handle 850... That's why we looked in version 3 as it has rocksdb... When we started to load bigger values into it. It seemed to get slower. BR Matej V sob., 9. jul. 2022 21:22 je oseba Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> napisala: > What about Ignite 2? It is great for KV scenarios, and the Java client is > first-class. > > On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 6:51 PM Pavel Tupitsyn <ptupit...@apache.org> > wrote: > >> Hi, >> >> Ignite 3 is in alpha stage, it is way too early to do any benchmarks. >> We are aware of existing performance issues, those will be fixed. Right >> now the focus is on correctness and features. >> >> > Are there any plans for Ignite 3 to have more low level functions like >> the scan api to iterate over rocksdb keys quickly >> Yes, I think so. >> >> On Sat, Jul 9, 2022 at 4:28 PM Matej <gma...@gmail.com> wrote: >> >>> Hi All. >>> >>> We like TiKV, it's fast, low level with low latency. But the problem is >>> their java client is useless. >>> >>> Ignite 3 seems to go more in the storage direction. But he API seems >>> high-level. We testes for speed and it seems much more slower then Ignite 2 >>> and Tikv . >>> >>> Are there any plans for Ignite 3 to have more low level functions like >>> the scan api to iterate over rocksdb keys quickly. And have everything more >>> binary to not loose to much on schema stuff. >>> >>> Overall I really like the ignite 3 direction. >>> >>> BR >>> >>> Matej. >>> >>>
