Hacker News Board Hacker News, browsed like a classic message board
Live data from Hacker News

Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

blog.timescale.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

81–90 of 220 posts

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#81

Post by tnolet »

heipei wrote: post #74

Does TimescaleDB support automated downsampling using various functions (min/max/mean/avg) and then during querying automatically picking the correct downsampled data? This is the biggest issue that I and others have with InfluxDB, that it doesn't do that, so the only convenient way to use it is just to expire all data outside the retention policy. Ticket here: https://github.com/influxdata/influxdb/issues/7198

Very very interested in this too. Sometimes called automated roll ups. I know Elasticsearch does this

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#82

Post by teraflop »

akulkarni wrote: post #49
PaulWaldman wrote: post #38

I understand that the Timescale license can't be utilized by cloud providers, but what about others who need a timeseries database for their SaaS offering? Is this permitted as long as you aren't marketing a hosted TimescaleDB solution? Edit: wording

That would be permitted, as long as the service isn't just a "TimescaleDB-as-a-service." [0] For example, if the service allowed users to only make DML changes (access / modify data) then it is ok, but DDL changes (creating / modifying database schemas) is not permitted. In fact, we already have 100s of SaaS companies using TimescaleDB as part of their offering. [0] https://www.timescale.com/legal/licenses

More specifically, the text of the license says you can't offer any service that is "primarily a database storage or operations product", even one that doesn't allow schema modifications.

If that wasn't what you intended to prohibit, you should probably fix the wording of section 3.21(i).

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#84

Post by GordonS »

pritambaral wrote: post #72
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #29

Earlier quoted context omitted.

In principle, yes I agree, but in practice: no! AGPL is a minefield, it's a shame it is, but it is. The spirit of GPL (and AGPL) was that you could do whatever you want but you have to release the source, but they have continually been handicapped by the evolution of software. Existing licenses are not appropriate for SaaS businesses, they are either too liberal or too restrictive. What you're seeing here is the righ…

> The spirit of free software is very much alive in this decision, methinks. From the text of the Timescale License, clause 2.1 (d): "A license to prepare, compile, and test Derivative Works of the TSL Licensed Software Source Code solely in a Non-Production Environment". Further along, in section 2.2, the following prohibition is laid out: "You agree not to, except as expressly permitted in Section 2.1(d), prepare D…

This is only for the parts of the code that are licensed under the Timescale license (most code is not).

Personally, I don't have a problem with this, and think it encourages users to upstream their changes.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#85

Post by mfreed »

jakaroo wrote: post #56

How does the multi-node version work with data compression compared to the single-node version? I like how on a single-node I can utilize data compression and get a 95% storage saving.

In the current version, you can execute `compress_chunks` on each of the data nodes and enjoy those same savings (and will work transparently with queries, as before).

In subsequent releases, we'll add full support of compression, e.g., just create a compression policy on the access node and you are off and running.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#86

Post by atanasovskib »

heipei wrote: post #74

Does TimescaleDB support automated downsampling using various functions (min/max/mean/avg) and then during querying automatically picking the correct downsampled data? This is the biggest issue that I and others have with InfluxDB, that it doesn't do that, so the only convenient way to use it is just to expire all data outside the retention policy. Ticket here: https://github.com/influxdata/influxdb/issues/7198

I think what you are referring to is the TimescaleDB real-time aggregates https://docs.timescale.com/latest/using-timescaledb/continuo...

It allows you to define aggregations that are automatically used when quering the raw table if the query matches, and it also allows you to drow the raw data with a retention policy but keep the aggregated form (https://docs.timescale.com/latest/using-timescaledb/continuo...)

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#87

Post by atanasovskib »

tnolet wrote: post #81
heipei wrote: post #74

Does TimescaleDB support automated downsampling using various functions (min/max/mean/avg) and then during querying automatically picking the correct downsampled data? This is the biggest issue that I and others have with InfluxDB, that it doesn't do that, so the only convenient way to use it is just to expire all data outside the retention policy. Ticket here: https://github.com/influxdata/influxdb/issues/7198

Very very interested in this too. Sometimes called automated roll ups. I know Elasticsearch does this

I replied to the parent comment. In short yes, it is supported (https://docs.timescale.com/latest/using-timescaledb/continuo...)

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#88

Post by akulkarni »

__s wrote: post #60
xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #37

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Frankly the pedantry around the definition of Open Source, which I understand, is incredibly nauseating. Sure, this isn't Open Source by "the definition", but it's close enough if you squint. The difference doesn't impact almost anyone. Are you or someone you love impacted by this licensing decision? Throw in an expiry date, dual licensing (pay to play seems more than fair) and I'm content. History be damned. I'm so…

Yep. I've been putting code out for free (MIT) for over a decade. I'm an open source developer. But I'll decide what gatekeeping I participate in for myself thank you Maybe we just need to have "little O" open source. Unless someone's saying "Open Source" don't get in on splitting these hairs

"little o" open source is clever.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#89

Post by CameronNemo »

eloff wrote: post #26
CameronNemo wrote: post #15

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> I think we're too hung up on OSI open source licenses. I disagree. The free software criteria were defined as they are for a reason. AWS and other cloud vendors are taking advantage, but that is not a good reason to give up on the ideals of the movement. I would be much more comfortable contributing to timescaledb if the license had a date at which it expired to AGPL or some other OSI/DFSG/fourfreedoms license.

Ideals for the sake of ideals doesn't resonate with me, in software or outside of it. Give me a practical reason. The expiry clause is interesting, but I'm not sure it matters in practice. Not many people want to use code several years out of date instead of the current version just because of practically no additional freedoms. Except maybe a potential competitor. I'd be happier to have a reversion to an OSI license…

> Ideals for the sake of ideals doesn't resonate with me, in software or outside of it. Give me a practical reason.

Fair enough.

I am mainly looking to prevent the timescale corp. from coasting off of their long past work. In such a scenario, the several years out of date code would not be that much different from the current version, because income for timescale would not have been spent on meaningful improvements.

Another benefit is as a check to the timescale corp. in case they start acting up. In such a case, a large contributor or user might pick up maintenance of an old version and start porting it to newer postgresql versions as leverage. Users of TimescaleDB could be reassured that timescale will not abuse them through the licensing situation because there is some backup plan.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#90

Post by tpayet »

xyzzy_plugh wrote: post #37
eitland wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> That sounds like open source to me, I bet they're just being really conservative about saying "open source" because people there's been so much backlash at MongoDB/Cockroach/etc for similar restrictions. Open Source has a very defined meaning. Please read up on the history of open source and source available licenses before saying it is all the same. We've been defending it against a number of attacks and we will p…

Frankly the pedantry around the definition of Open Source, which I understand, is incredibly nauseating. Sure, this isn't Open Source by "the definition", but it's close enough if you squint. The difference doesn't impact almost anyone. Are you or someone you love impacted by this licensing decision? Throw in an expiry date, dual licensing (pay to play seems more than fair) and I'm content. History be damned. I'm so…

I am glad to hear there are more and more people that accepts those new kind of open source, not the official definition of the OSI but more like the global idea behind it
Post reply on HN