FoundationDB Document Layer
foundationdb.org
FoundationDB Document Layer
1–10 of 36 posts
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#2This is massive for adoption. Can't wait to give it a try.
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#3Really excited that they were able to release this layer. With the changes to the license of MongoDB it could give people a real alternative.
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#4That's huge. I could have used this a few years ago
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#5Is there any reason to expect fundamental inefficiencies with this approach vs a vertically integrated approach like a conventional document store? Any other downsides? I ask because this seems like to obviously good an idea to be true, so I need to look for the flip side before I get to excited. Otherwise, this laying seems like the obvious approach, and I can only lament that it's taken this long.
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#6Wonderful. I just updated the FoundationDB packages in NixOS to 6.0.15 at the release earlier this month. Will try packaging this up soon as well...
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#7Is there any reason to expect fundamental inefficiencies with this approach vs a vertically integrated approach like a conventional document store? Any other downsides? I ask because this seems like to obviously good an idea to be true, so I need to look for the flip side before I get to excited. Otherwise, this laying seems like the obvious approach, and I can only lament that it's taken this long.
Yes, the layered approach will always consume more bandwidth unless you just happen to hit the case where your transaction is read-only and the layer process is colocated with the storage server where your data is.
The upsides far outweigh this downside in my opinion. The fact that writes are buffered locally before committing the transaction (improving latency) is probably enough by itself to overcome that downside.
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#8Are there any plans to extend the API compatibility of the document layer to be compatible with other APIs, such as, DynamoDB?
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#9Is there any reason to expect fundamental inefficiencies with this approach vs a vertically integrated approach like a conventional document store? Any other downsides? I ask because this seems like to obviously good an idea to be true, so I need to look for the flip side before I get to excited. Otherwise, this laying seems like the obvious approach, and I can only lament that it's taken this long.
Yes, the layered approach will always consume more bandwidth unless you just happen to hit the case where your transaction is read-only and the layer process is colocated with the storage server where your data is. The upsides far outweigh this downside in my opinion. The fact that writes are buffered locally before committing the transaction (improving latency) is probably enough by itself to overcome that downside.
Interesting, TiDB also three components [0](KV, DB and PD), I guess this MongoDB layer in FoundationDB is the DB piece of the cluster.
Re: FoundationDB Document Layer
#10Just wandering how will foindationDb compare to mongo in terms of the non functional s - performance, scale of a collection, number of collections, queries with and without indexes, aggregated, etc.