Title should be "Open-source Amazon RDS alternative".
Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
31–40 of 53 posts
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#32Title should be "Open-source Amazon RDS alternative".
Yeah, the original title was "Show HN: OSS PostgreSQL RDS with Supabase,PostgresML,Vector,HA,PITR,Monitor,&100+ Extensions" ... now auto-renamed without the "RDS" part...
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#33HN title notwithstanding, this is a distribution of PostgreSQL (i.e. many optional extensions built in), not an “alternative”. Also, both PostgreSQL and this alternate bundle are indeed Open Source.
> many optional extensions built in
> Battery-Included PostgreSQL Distribution, with 150+ powerful extensions!
Wow, you weren't kidding.
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#34Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does it look fragile?
The project lists dozens of extensions that it supports. The likelihood of one of them not working properly is very high.
For frequently used extensions such as PostGIS, TimescaleDB, Vector, Repack, etc., it can be assured that they function together as expected.
Regarding other extensions, they are only guaranteed to be installed and `CREATE` without error.
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#35Earlier quoted context omitted.
Personally, I like the AGPL. It means that when a place uses / extends the code, it's pretty likely they're intending on contributing back. It's the places that go "Ewwww... AGPLv3!" that you have to wonder about.
Until AGPL3 is tested on court I'll keep avoiding it for my day job. While I appreciate the idea, I'd rather not risk my livelihood. My employers do contribute (however modestly) to FOSS, though typically MIT licensed.
What test do you want to see in court? Is it due to concern of the virality of the license infecting software that uses it? Or due to concern that the license doesn't actually protect what it claims to and would be found unenforceable by the court?
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#36HN title notwithstanding, this is a distribution of PostgreSQL (i.e. many optional extensions built in), not an “alternative”. Also, both PostgreSQL and this alternate bundle are indeed Open Source.
The title was auto-updated without the crucial "RDS/Distribution" part before "alternative"...
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#37Interesting, but unless you understand every piece of software running and how they interact and are deployed, running this sounds like a devops and security nightmare.
That’s my thing. I closed the docs as soon as I opened them because I already couldn’t imagine convincing anyone this was a good idea enough to convince me it was a good idea. If that made any sense
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#38Interesting, but unless you understand every piece of software running and how they interact and are deployed, running this sounds like a devops and security nightmare.
That’s my thing. I closed the docs as soon as I opened them because I already couldn’t imagine convincing anyone this was a good idea enough to convince me it was a good idea. If that made any sense
Yup me too, it's great that it's extensible, but it's also it's immediate problem.
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#39So what’s the difference between this and me just running postgres in a docker container and enabling these extensions?
Re: Show HN: Pigsty – Free RDS Alternative
#40Earlier quoted context omitted.
The project lists dozens of extensions that it supports. The likelihood of one of them not working properly is very high.
For frequently used extensions such as PostGIS, TimescaleDB, Vector, Repack, etc., it can be assured that they function together as expected. Regarding other extensions, they are only guaranteed to be installed and `CREATE` without error.
I think all the additional layers are the issue for me. There's a lot of moving pieces here that should each be integration tested independently rather than included all together.