[erlang-questions] 1000+ users; 30+ data tables/user
Tue Nov 11 21:02:14 CET 2014
On Tue, Nov 11, 2014 at 7:41 PM, Garrett Smith <> wrote:
> Hi Lloyd,
> Sorry for the late reply here - I was interested in this thread last
> week when you sent it but was in sleep deprived conference mode and
> never got back to it.
> On Tue, Nov 4, 2014 at 8:49 PM, Lloyd R. Prentice <> wrote:
>> This is a naive question reflecting my inexperience with databases.
>> I'm planning to offer my users a set of management/planning tools. Each user would be storing/retrieving user-specific data involving as many as 30 data tables.
>> --- Data fits well into Erlang records.
>> --- We're not talking huge volumes of data per user.
>> --- Nor do I expect much data analysis.
>> --- Data integrity and availability are essential.
>> --- Users may, however, wish to bundle up their data a some point and migrate to a different system.
>> I'm attracted to mnesia because of it's it's tight integration with Erlang and it's replication features. I'm also considering riak.
>> My first thought was that every user would own his/her own database. But this seems to rule out
>> mnesia since:
>> "Mnesia is a truly distributed DBMS and the schema is a system table that is replicated on all nodes in a Mnesia system. The function will fail if a schema is already present on any of the nodes in NodeList."
>> An option would be to store data for all users in each of the 30 tables. But is there a better solution altogether?
>> I'd much appreciate suggestions and guidance from wiser heads.
> I think we've all had this problem - a new project and nothing to hold
> us back but our own imagination. So the question... which database to
> pick. Which indeed? There are like 100 amazing options!
> My suggestion here is to stop this line of thinking immediately :)
> I would instead plan to throw your early work away. Pick something
> that is the fastest and easiest imaginable for you to make progress on
> your app. Treat it as a "this will almost certainly not be what I end
> up with".
> _For me_ this means one of these:
> - Hard coded values or config files
> - Dets
> - SQLite
> - MySQL
> The point is to keep it as simple as possible and just get stuff working.
For many systems - I use one file per user. The file contains term_to_binary(X)
where X is whatever I feel like to represent the use data.
(or you can use text files - then you can run amazing things like grep and find
on them :-)
The OS caches file access and I can easily analyse/dump the files.
I've *never* got to the point where I need to change the file system for
a database (but then again I've not built a really big system - and
this works fine
for several thousand files/users)
If and when the design problems are solved you can change representations
*if it is necessary* - choosing a database right at the start is
"premature optimisation" - if you ever get to this point then the
choice of representation
should be dictated by measurement and not guesswork.
> When I'm starting on something new, I just don't know enough about
> anything to make the right decision - so I deliberately make the right
> _wrong_ decision - that is, the decision that will let me move forward
> quickly and get to the real problems. I might throw it away later, or
> I might keep it. But in any case, I'm sure as hell not going to spend
> a lot of time on it. Not until I'm facing real, hard, visible problems
> that I can use to inform my next steps.
> erlang-questions mailing list
More information about the erlang-questions