You signed in with another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You signed out in another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.You switched accounts on another tab or window. Reload to refresh your session.Dismiss alert
Copy file name to clipboardExpand all lines: README.md
+1-1Lines changed: 1 addition & 1 deletion
Display the source diff
Display the rich diff
Original file line number
Diff line number
Diff line change
@@ -844,7 +844,7 @@ Common ways to shard a table of users is either through the user's last name ini
844
844
##### Disadvantage(s): sharding
845
845
846
846
* You'll need to update your application logic to work with shards, which could result in complex SQL queries.
847
-
* Data distribution can become lobsided in a shard. For example, a set of power users on a shard could result in increased load to that shard compared to others.
847
+
* Data distribution can become lopsided in a shard. For example, a set of power users on a shard could result in increased load to that shard compared to others.
848
848
* Rebalancing adds additional complexity. A sharding function based on [consistent hashing](http://www.paperplanes.de/2011/12/9/the-magic-of-consistent-hashing.html) can reduce the amount of transferred data.
849
849
* Joining data from multiple shards is more complex.
850
850
* Sharding adds more hardware and additional complexity.
0 commit comments