Sequential IDs in Neptune?
@neptune
I'm attempting to implement sequential IDs for the vertices in our AWS Neptune graph. So far, we have added a new property called
My question is: How will Neptune handle this at scale? For context, we have a distributed architechture in which tens or hundreds (in super rare cases, maybe over a thousand?) new vertexes can be created per SECOND, meaning our db cluster probably sees a lot of concurrent transactions. We are looking for information on how Neptune will handle the initial read query with, for example, 10 or more concurrent transactions. Will all 10+ transactions return the same
Thanks!
I'm attempting to implement sequential IDs for the vertices in our AWS Neptune graph. So far, we have added a new property called
vertexNumbervertexNumberMy question is: How will Neptune handle this at scale? For context, we have a distributed architechture in which tens or hundreds (in super rare cases, maybe over a thousand?) new vertexes can be created per SECOND, meaning our db cluster probably sees a lot of concurrent transactions. We are looking for information on how Neptune will handle the initial read query with, for example, 10 or more concurrent transactions. Will all 10+ transactions return the same
vertexNumberThanks!
Solution
@andys1814 How much do you care about the ids being truly sequential or is having some gaps acceptable as long as they are human readable?
I ask as this was a common request when I was working with Cassandra. A common practice was to allot a range of ids to each client on connection versus getting a new one each time. When a client exhausts it's assigned range it then reaches out to get a new range.
This helps to minimize the single point of failure and additional overhead of having to go to a single coordinator to get an id value for each request. It does however means that inserts will not be in sequential order and that you may have gaps in the number. This may or may not be an issue depending on your use case.
I ask as this was a common request when I was working with Cassandra. A common practice was to allot a range of ids to each client on connection versus getting a new one each time. When a client exhausts it's assigned range it then reaches out to get a new range.
This helps to minimize the single point of failure and additional overhead of having to go to a single coordinator to get an id value for each request. It does however means that inserts will not be in sequential order and that you may have gaps in the number. This may or may not be an issue depending on your use case.
