101–110 of 456 posts
Is this similar to AWS Aurora or is this something else completely different?
Aurora is not globally distributed. Spanner is, and is based on Google research which takes advantage of atomic clocks installed in each server: https://research.google.com/archive/spanner-osdi2012.pdf Edit: not every server has an atomic clock; see replies by Google employees
Congratulations to the Spanner team for becoming part of the Google public cloud! And for those wondering, this is why Oracle wants billions of dollars from Google for "Java Copyright Infringement" because the only growth market for Oracle right now is their hosted database service, and whoops Google has a better one now. It will be interesting if Amazon and Microsoft choose to compete with Google on this service. If…
This is not true. Oracle is far more than a database company nowadays in the same way that Microsoft is more than Windows. Oracle has been acquiring high-growth startups at a significant rate.
Congratulations to the Spanner team for becoming part of the Google public cloud! And for those wondering, this is why Oracle wants billions of dollars from Google for "Java Copyright Infringement" because the only growth market for Oracle right now is their hosted database service, and whoops Google has a better one now. It will be interesting if Amazon and Microsoft choose to compete with Google on this service. If…
If he was alive, he could say these computers are Google, Apple, Microsoft, Amazon and Facebook.
I wonder why they charge a minimum of $0.90 per node-hour when they offer VMs for as little as $0.008/hr. This is hugely useful even for single-person startups, so why charge a minimum of ~$8,000 per year?
Concur. The pricing makes sense for their "target market" of folks who currently have a "bursting at the seams" MySQL or PgSQL instance, but it locks out folks just getting started with a tiny database and low load. This seems like bad positioning: the "bursting" folks will have to decide between the cost of re-hosting their whole system on the Cloud Spanner and trying to incrementally keep their current platform run…
My intuition, which I hope is wrong, suggests this is a small market.
With Aurora the basic instance is $48/month and they recommend at least two in separate zones for availability, so it's about $96/month minimum. Storage is $.10/GB and IO is $.20 per million requests. Data transfer starts at $.09/GB and the first GB is free.[1]
Spanner is a minimum of $650/mo (6X the Aurora minimum), storage is $.30/GB (3X), and data transfer starts at $.12/GB (1.3X).
Of course with Aurora you have to pick your instance size and bigger faster instances will cost more. Also there's the matter of multi-region replication, although it appears that aspect of Spanner is not priced out yet. So maybe as you scale the gap narrows, but it's interesting to price out the entry point for startups.
Congratulations to the Spanner team for becoming part of the Google public cloud! And for those wondering, this is why Oracle wants billions of dollars from Google for "Java Copyright Infringement" because the only growth market for Oracle right now is their hosted database service, and whoops Google has a better one now. It will be interesting if Amazon and Microsoft choose to compete with Google on this service. If…
Amazon's Aurora databases seem to be solving the same problem, and are MySQL or Postgres compatible to boot.
To be fair, Spanner's cross-region service is coming "later 2017".
Congratulations to the Spanner team for becoming part of the Google public cloud! And for those wondering, this is why Oracle wants billions of dollars from Google for "Java Copyright Infringement" because the only growth market for Oracle right now is their hosted database service, and whoops Google has a better one now. It will be interesting if Amazon and Microsoft choose to compete with Google on this service. If…
Amazon's Aurora databases seem to be solving the same problem, and are MySQL or Postgres compatible to boot.
> This leads to three kinds of systems: CA, CP and AP, What is a distributed system that is CA? Can you build a distributed system which will never have a partition.
Trivially, by never allowing either half of a partition to make progress while the partition is in place. Since the CAP theorem, by itself, doesn't put a cap(oof) on latency, it is valid to consider a system CA, if it if always available to listen to requests while partitioned, but never able to fulfill them. This, of course, is effectively useless in practice, and is dependent on an infinite buffer of pending operat…
Doesn't availability mean getting a response on success or failure. If during a partition there is no response on success of failure how is the system available? It seems re-writing a term like "x will happen" to "x will happen after an infinite timeout" should not be valid
Google prefers building advanced systems that let you do things "the old way" but making them horizontally scalable.
Amazon prefers to acknowledge that network partitions exist and try to get you to do things "the new way" that deals with that failure case in the software instead of trying to hide it.
I'm not saying either system is better than the other, but doing it Google's way is certainly easier for Enterprises that want to make the move, and why Amazon is starting to break with tradition and release products that let you do things "the old way" while hiding the details in an abstraction.
I've always said that Google is technically better than AWS, but no one will ever know because they don't have a strong sales team to go and show people.
This release only solidifies that point.