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

91–100 of 220 posts

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#91

Post by heipei »

atanasovskib wrote: post #86
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... )

OK, but it looks like I still have to define these aggregates manually. I was really more talking about the standard use-case that folks used to use Graphite / rrdtool for: Keep track of real-time high-fidelity metrics while still being able to query aggressively-downsampled historical data for comparison, and doing so without having to configure anything.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#92

Post by contrahax »

tornato7 wrote: post #17

Awesome. I just hope that one day Amazon supports it on RDS. I do know that Digital Ocean does!

I would recommend looking at Aiven if you want to deploy Timescale on AWS (we use it to deploy on GCP, which is also missing the extension in their CloudSQL offering).

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#93

Post by mfreed »

pritambaral wrote: post #78
tomnipotent wrote: post #45

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Please read up on the history of open source Not this patronizing bullshit again. The term "open source" was marketing to take advantage of Netscape releasing their source code. Since since, everyone seems keen on trying to usurp its definition for whatever personal perspective they have that week. To the rest of the community outside of the OSI and FSF (which is 99%+ of the software community), this is a perfectly…

> To the rest of the community outside of the OSI and FSF (which is 99%+ of the software community), this is a perfectly acceptable example of "open source" Please review clause 2.1 (d) and section 2.2. The freedom to run your own modifications in production is not granted. This is a big deal, and rightly a deal-breaking omission for something to be acceptable as either open source or free (as in freedom). > The Time…

Just for clarification: This limitation only applies to code under the Timescale License, while most of our code is licensed under the Apache 2.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#94

Post by pritambaral »

GordonS wrote: post #84
pritambaral wrote: post #72

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> 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.

> ... it encourages users to upstream their changes.

Not really, and not as much. Not really because one cannot begin using their own changes unless and until the upstreaming process concludes successfully. Not as much because, unlike with open-source licenses, one does not get to keep their copyright.

One of the important reasons I personally use and support open-source is the freedom to not only inspect (which the TSL provides) but to also not have to ask someone else and wait on them to make any changes I need to the software I use. The restriction against production use prevents that.

One of the important reasons I personally don't mind contributing to open-source, is the fact that I get to retain my rights.

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

This is a moot point because without the parts that are TSL licensed, we'd not be having this discussion.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#95

Post by mfreed »

malisper wrote: post #73
mfreed wrote: post #55

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Hi @malisper, we totally appreciate concerns around potential uncertainty what a "Value Added Service" means. In fact, when we were looking at Timescale licensing, we took careful look at what a lot of other like company licenses did here (Confluent, Redis, etc), and what later became the Polyform License. Most of them left this definition pretty vague -- because frankly, legal language is never as precise (and perha…

> We went a step further, and tried to define this more precisely about what it means to "offer" TimescaleDB I don't understand how the bit you posted helped make things more concrete? Section 3.21, the section you referenced lists three conditions, all of which have to be true for your product to be considered "Value Added". I agree the third condition, the one you quoted, is pretty clear. But the second condition,…

> FWIW, Heap would automatically create new tables for customers as they sign up and would also automatically create new indexes for customers as needed. For that reason alone, I'm pretty sure Heap would violate the Timescale license.

Nope! The user doesn't define or control that those tables and indexes are created. I.e., the user, through the Heap UI, doesn't say: I want a table with this schema and I want to create an index on (event_id, timestamp).

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#96

Post by lukevp »

pritambaral wrote: post #66
akulkarni wrote: post #16

Earlier quoted context omitted.

(Timescale CEO and post author) You are spot on. Before the Timescale License, we were left with a tough decision: do we open-source a feature so that everyone can have it for free OR do we close a feature so that the mega-clouds don't have access to it? We didn't like either of those options, which is why we created the Timescale License, which allows us to offer capabilities for free (and make the source code avail…

> and make the source code available It's available to _see_, but not to "prepare, compile, and test Derivative Works of the TSL Licensed Software Source Code" in a production environment, as per your license's clause 2.1 (d). That's a pretty big departure from open-source; and a bit discouraging for use by non-mega-cloud business interests too. One of the important reasons I personally use and support open-source is…

Is this really an issue in practice? For libraries (react, jquery) that can’t be used on their own as a product, a lot are adopting MIT. For a “service” - mongodb, redis, rabbitmq, Kafka, Postgres, etc. I have never run into an issue where I would be comfortable modifying something, rebuilding source and deploying into production.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#97

Post by pritambaral »

mfreed wrote: post #93
pritambaral wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> To the rest of the community outside of the OSI and FSF (which is 99%+ of the software community), this is a perfectly acceptable example of "open source" Please review clause 2.1 (d) and section 2.2. The freedom to run your own modifications in production is not granted. This is a big deal, and rightly a deal-breaking omission for something to be acceptable as either open source or free (as in freedom). > The Time…

Just for clarification: This limitation only applies to code under the Timescale License, while most of our code is licensed under the Apache 2.

Of course, this discussion is not about code that _is_ open-source. It is about the code that isn't but some people would like us to believe is — and I'm quoting my parent comment here — "a perfectly acceptable example of "open source"".

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#98

Post by brightball »

akulkarni wrote: post #16
eloff wrote: post #4

This is an interesting window into their business model. This could be a purely an altruistic decision, which businesses sometimes do, contrary to popular belief. More likely it's a bet that wider adoption from making the clustered version free will drive more revenue through their managed database as a service offering. Which shows that their non-OSI open-source license is actually leading to more code and features…

(Timescale CEO and post author) You are spot on. Before the Timescale License, we were left with a tough decision: do we open-source a feature so that everyone can have it for free OR do we close a feature so that the mega-clouds don't have access to it? We didn't like either of those options, which is why we created the Timescale License, which allows us to offer capabilities for free (and make the source code avail…

I imagine the model will be effective because it will help you to increase adoption, provide an easy path to transition to your cloud managed version and likely a lot of support/training opportunities.

Plus, it makes it easier to just start with Timescale even if you don’t need it because we all like to preoptimize.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#99

Post by EvanAnderson »

I really appreciate that the linked article uses the phrasing "source-available", the lower case "free", and doesn't use the phrase "open source". Terminology matters a lot.

For me, a lot of the value in Free software comes from being able to make modifications to the software (either yourself, or by hiring others), and generally being in control of your own "software destiny".

With that in mind, I think it's important to call attention to this license's prohibition of running modified versions in production. This prohibition applies regardless of your modifications being distributed (and in fact, later in the license, distribution of modifications is expressly prohibited as well):

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 ...

I've often pined for visibility into the source code of proprietary software that I use. I suppose this is a "win" for TimescaleDB in my mind over source-unavailable proprietary software. In the end, however, this license means it's still just proprietary software.

Re: Multi-node TimescaleDB is now free

#100

Post by pritambaral »

lukevp wrote: post #96
pritambaral wrote: post #66

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> and make the source code available It's available to _see_, but not to "prepare, compile, and test Derivative Works of the TSL Licensed Software Source Code" in a production environment, as per your license's clause 2.1 (d). That's a pretty big departure from open-source; and a bit discouraging for use by non-mega-cloud business interests too. One of the important reasons I personally use and support open-source is…

Is this really an issue in practice? For libraries (react, jquery) that can’t be used on their own as a product, a lot are adopting MIT. For a “service” - mongodb, redis, rabbitmq, Kafka, Postgres, etc. I have never run into an issue where I would be comfortable modifying something, rebuilding source and deploying into production.

> I have never ...

_You_ may not have, but plenty of us have. Although, it's not as important when or how many times one has _needed_ to exercise one's freedoms, as it is to have them. But yes, plenty of us open-source users and supporters have exercised this very freedom. In fact, quite a lot of open-source contributions happen _because_ of this freedom: someone has an itch, they scratch it, and _then_ they upstream it.

Post reply on HN