221–230 of 290 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You're completely missing the point. The point isn't to stop AWS from integrating. The point is to get a slice of the pie if AWS does decide to do an integration because now, with the new license, AWS needs to come to them first and ask for a license, which I'm sure they would give with reasonable terms.
Indeed. If AWS makes a load of money out of Cockroach's hard work, why shouldn't Cockroach get a slice of it?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They already have - Amazon has Aurora, which has MySQL and Postgres compatibility. I'm sure if there's enough demand, Amazon will add CockroadDB compatibility to Aurora in the not-too-distant future.
> Amazon has Aurora, which has MySQL and Postgres compatibility Which lags behind upstream in versioning and has its own quirks. Or Redshift, which is still stuck in Postgres 8 and absolutely has its own quirks.
No doubt re-implentation will lag and will not be perfect (either buggy, or not buggy enough to match reference). The big question: is it AWS users shopping for DBs, or MySQL/Postgres/CockroachDB users shopping for *aaS services? I suspect the former outnumber the latter, and they will likely tolerate being behind the bleeding edge.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Redis labs doesn’t run on all regions / cloud providers sadly. I’ve asked (begged) them to support GCE in Europe for a while now... even not all AWS regions are supported as far as I’m aware.
Yes, and they're one of the better vendors, which shows how bad vendors are at managed services.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Yea, that sounds like an excuse. The APIs are all public. The company can build whatever integrations they want to offer. For example, many already use EC2, VPCs, S3, Lambda, Kinesis, etc. to extend their databases into a client's architecture, and it's no different than what AWS provides.
One difference is that AWS etc. can run software on bare metal if they want. (I suspect they are doing just that with their hosted Kafka offering.) Even with the new EC2 bare metal instances, I don’t think you could roll your own for a competitive price (IME packet.net is much cheaper than EC2 for on-demand bare metal, with a much better UX).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Indeed. If AWS makes a load of money out of Cockroach's hard work, why shouldn't Cockroach get a slice of it?
> Indeed. If AWS makes a load of money out of Cockroach's hard work, why shouldn't Cockroach get a slice of it? They should have thought about that before benefitting from it being open source.
They have thought about it! That's why they are using the BSL.
I note that they are using a time-delayed open source approach (after 3 years it becomes open source) which I understand Stallman has endorsed in the past.
I’m still not sure why people open source great products then get outraged that someone else would simply resell the product and make money off of it, possibly even more than them. When I put something out as open source, I’m doing it fully aware that I am leaving money on the table, but it will be worth it if a community of maintainers springs up around the project and ends up making it far better and more useful th…
Could someone say just take a normal open source license, like MIT, and just add a provision saying, if you are Amazon, Google, Microsoft, this license doesn't apply to you and you are not permitted to use the code in any way? Basically, just blacklist certain companies that compete with you directly.
This is more validation of the threat that cloud providers (mainly AWS) are to businesses built around open source products. Yes, AWS and others are legally permitted by existing open source licenses to create SaaS versions of these open source products, but with cloud computing becoming an increasingly winner-take-all market, it leaves little room for the software's authors to generate revenue via hosted offerings o…
The problem with this argument is that there has always been a before and after. IE This is not the first business model issue OSS has dealt with. For example: It seems ridiculous now, but at one point authors were significantly squeezed by commercial distros offering support and feature work directly to customers for their packages. (And this was even a similar kind of disintermediation applied to authors as you see…
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I estimate the odds that AWS Aurora will offer "massive scale SQL without manual shading" in the next 3 years to be >95%. Then why would anyone want to to use Cockroach? They need to differentiate on something else. Ideally something that Amazon is unwilling to do, or would find very hard to do.
Amazon may be unwilling or unable to be multi-cloud. Companies worried about being stuck in a silo may think twice if they have a more convenient option. Besides, crdb does worldwide SQL databases now, and the only competitor at that level is not Aurora, it is Google Cloud Spanner, at a much higher price range and with very limited options.
Once every top infra team at MS & Google realized they can be a saas/paaas revenue center, not just saving 1% in internal costs, that made the whole "Google for everyone else" VC funding wave feel like musical chairs.
It does feel like a good ("least bad") move given the environment. We have taken an "embrace" approach to using/contributing to OSS and assuming commoditization of database+compute tech (Apache Arrow, Nvidia RAPIDS, ...). We've wanted to further open most of our code, not just those libs, so we're not the only ones writing funny distributed GPU webapp+etl stuff... but couldn't find a way that made sense so far. So, I've been watching with great interest, and good luck to the teams involved!
Earlier quoted context omitted.
How does this move disqualify CRDB as a dependency of other open source projects?
The majority of open source projects need to be usable without installing proprietary dependencies. Whatever you might think of CockroachDB's choice, this means that any other project depending on them makes their users deal with that license too, and while CockroachDB might be willing to push that on their users, that doesn't mean other projects want to follow them down that path and lose their users in the process.…