Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
1–10 of 166 posts
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#2pgrust seems to have good momentum. AGPL is an odd license for a non web project. Postgres is MIT-like, and that drove it's adoption.
Have pgrust folks reconsidered this? Else, IMO we can have an independant rust port of pgrust, which can be MIT, which will garner more attention.
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#3pgrust seems to have good momentum. AGPL is an odd license for a non web project. Postgres is MIT-like, and that drove it's adoption. Have pgrust folks reconsidered this? Else, IMO we can have an independant rust port of pgrust, which can be MIT, which will garner more attention.
2 commits in the repo both generated by claude. This is AI slop, I wonder where you see good momentum?
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#4pgrust seems to have good momentum. AGPL is an odd license for a non web project. Postgres is MIT-like, and that drove it's adoption. Have pgrust folks reconsidered this? Else, IMO we can have an independant rust port of pgrust, which can be MIT, which will garner more attention.
2 commits in the repo both generated by claude. This is AI slop, I wonder where you see good momentum?
4K stargazers in a week.
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#5pgrust seems to have good momentum. AGPL is an odd license for a non web project. Postgres is MIT-like, and that drove it's adoption. Have pgrust folks reconsidered this? Else, IMO we can have an independant rust port of pgrust, which can be MIT, which will garner more attention.
2 commits in the repo both generated by claude. This is AI slop, I wonder where you see good momentum?
main indeed has two commits, but it clearly states the location of the rest of the commits, so I wouldn't be critical of main itself.
hey claude, do a breakthrough
You can find the actual git history at the v0.2 github tag.
Co-Authored-By: Fable
It's easy to claim AI slop nowadays, but you should still mistrust-but-verify.
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#6pgrust seems to have good momentum. AGPL is an odd license for a non web project. Postgres is MIT-like, and that drove it's adoption. Have pgrust folks reconsidered this? Else, IMO we can have an independant rust port of pgrust, which can be MIT, which will garner more attention.
Everything around Rust is political, so the license choices are also about political statement.
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#7pgrust seems to have good momentum. AGPL is an odd license for a non web project. Postgres is MIT-like, and that drove it's adoption. Have pgrust folks reconsidered this? Else, IMO we can have an independant rust port of pgrust, which can be MIT, which will garner more attention.
Oh bummer. I was really excited about pgrust but AGPL is a dealbreaker. Not for me personally, but it will never see wide adoption because it’s a banned license in most corporate environments. Lack of path to wide adoption means it’s dead in the water.
It’s weird because those who actually care about optimized pg gains are most likely large corporate customers. Why make a product targeting them and license it in such a way they’ll never use it?
This also hard blocks upstreaming any beneficial features into core Postgres.
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#8pgrust seems to have good momentum. AGPL is an odd license for a non web project. Postgres is MIT-like, and that drove it's adoption. Have pgrust folks reconsidered this? Else, IMO we can have an independant rust port of pgrust, which can be MIT, which will garner more attention.
Everything around Rust is political, so the license choices are also about political statement.
Most official Rust projects are dual MIT/Apache licensed by convention [1] (and most Rust libraries from third parties I've seen that are open source MIT follow the MIT/Apache dual license), so seems like this library shouldn't just be AGPL for a typical political choice of a Rustacean?
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#9Earlier quoted context omitted.
Everything around Rust is political, so the license choices are also about political statement.
Most official Rust projects are dual MIT/Apache licensed by convention [1] (and most Rust libraries from third parties I've seen that are open source MIT follow the MIT/Apache dual license), so seems like this library shouldn't just be AGPL for a typical political choice of a Rustacean? [1]: https://rust-lang.org/policies/licenses/
official projects are usually run by sensible people who want to do things and aren't leading with ideology.
We're literally talking about an "X but in Rust" project already...
Re: Making Postgres 300x faster for analytics: batching, operator fusion, and SIMD
#10pgrust seems to have good momentum. AGPL is an odd license for a non web project. Postgres is MIT-like, and that drove it's adoption. Have pgrust folks reconsidered this? Else, IMO we can have an independant rust port of pgrust, which can be MIT, which will garner more attention.
Author here. At least for databases, AGPL (or stricter) has become standard. The issue is it's so easy for megacorps (Amazon, Google, etc) to take a permissively licensed product and monetize it at the expense of the original standard.
For instance, Mongo, Cockroach, and Materialize have all gone source available. We picked AGPL because it's the best balance between open source and prevents Amazon from just repackaging it and selling it.
If AGPL is an issue for anyone, we would be happy to dual-license under a commercial license.