161–170 of 453 posts
https://www.wavefront.com/wavefront-foundationdb-open-source...
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I just watched the demo of 5 machines and 2 getting unplugged. The remaining 3 can form a quorum. What happens if it was 3 and 3? Do they both form quorums?
A subset of the processes in a FoundationDB cluster have the job of maintaining coordination state (via disk Paxos). In any partition situation, if one of the partitions contains a majority of the coordinators then it will stay live, while minority partitions become unavailable.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Sorry if I missed it but can you or someone else please link where the client wire protocol is documented?
The client is complex and needs very sophisticated testing, so there is only one implementation. All the language bindings use the C library.
How does it compare to CockroachDB or TiDB?
In my understanding, FoundationDB's transaction management is closest to FaunaDB's; read/write sets are linearized in memory in preprocessing nodes and distributed asynchronously to the replicas rather than locked on the replica leaders like Spanner or CockroachDB. This is why FoundationDB doesn't support long-lived transactions.
It's interesting that the FoundationDB team chose to unwind their service architecture (there used to be separate transaction manager and replica processes), I assume in the interests of ease of operations.
It is not clear to me how leader election and failover works for the transaction management role. Maybe somebody from the team can clarify.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
~~How is it different from when Apple acquired the then-open-source FoundationDB (and shut down public access)? They could have just kept it open source back then.~~ EDIT: My bad, looks like FoundationDB wasn't fully open-source back then.
From what I recall (and based on some quick retro-googling) I don't believe Foudnation was open-source. One of the complaints about it on HN back in the day was that it was closed...
Found this section on performance very interesting. https://apple.github.io/foundationdb/performance.html#throug... I wonder what the SSD engine performance would look with NVMe standard NAND or an Optane SSD instead of SATA. Any FoundationDB guys/gals on this thread able to comment? Another Q: what's more commonly used in current FoundationDB deployments: memory engine or storage engine?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Wavefront's co-founder just tweeted this: https://twitter.com/panghy/status/987022825457266689 Finally it's out! @WavefrontHQ managaes petabyte scale clusters with #foundationdb today!
I'm confused. How they could use FoundationDB when Apple aquired it a long time ago? Did apple sell the software to other companies?
"because it is an ordered key-value store, FoundationDB can use range reads to efficiently scan large swaths of data" https://apple.github.io/foundationdb/features.html I wonder how it compares to MUMPS databases like Intersystems Cache and FIS GtM?
Noticed the Visual Studio project files. Was Windows a primary development platform for foundationdb?