31–40 of 42 posts
The reason: ha for databases is hard. However galera cluster and/or percona xtradb cluster work remarkably well, considering they’re open source.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Ah, you're right, sorry. I naively assumed rqlite would cope with similar dataset sizes to sqlite itself, which I think is likely to be limited by how much disk you can put on a single node. But it seems rqlite is much more limited on that dimension, so it doesn't fit your criteria.
Full details on what the limits in rqlite may be, and why, are here: https://github.com/rqlite/rqlite/blob/master/DOC/PERFORMANCE... That said, very large datasets (> 2GB) will work, if you've got the disks and memory to handle it. The link above explains how to do it.
You are missing something. You list several completely different types of databases and then mention you are looking for a "general purpose database". This tells me you do not understand the problem you are trying to solve, therefore do not know how to define the requirements nor features you require to solve it. It also tells me you do not understand the difference between different types of databases, nor the niche…
I have deployed and run Cassandra myself, basically as you describe. The first 'dev' Cassandra install was three nodes. I downloaded the .tar.gz, installed it, started each process in turn on each node with the required configuration. That was 2012 and there is a chance that cluster is still running. It was low-volume in terms of data. TTL configured so it would never run out of disk. Never had any issues in particul…
The community is still slowly recovering from the collapse of the company but RethinkDB is worth considering in your analysis.
> YugabyteDB: Fake Open Source. Special shout out here for not even linking to instructions for how to build the database in the readme. All the features are open source. Here is how to build from source https://docs.yugabyte.com/latest/contribute/core-database/bu... . > What do I mean by Fake Open Source? A project that has a large percentage of its contributors beholden to a single organization/entity to me is not…
I also did eventually find the docs for building the database. It just feels odd to have a roadmap in the readme but no actual information for getting set up on development. It's one of those things (and I grant it's a very small thing) that makes me feel like the platform isn't really for the community.
The community is still slowly recovering from the collapse of the company but RethinkDB is worth considering in your analysis.
I really liked RethinkDB (maybe even loved?), but its demise is one of those cautionary tales that makes me wary of these single-corporate-sponsor databases.
I’ll admit I definitely fell all the way into “loving” RethinkDB. I still have some sticker bundles from a meetup group merch package. It’s been an agonisingly slow recovery from the company’s demise, but I still hold onto some hope that it can recover and become a multi-stakeholder database with a steady development like PostgreSQL for the horizontal scale document database world.
> YugabyteDB: Fake Open Source. Special shout out here for not even linking to instructions for how to build the database in the readme. All the features are open source. Here is how to build from source https://docs.yugabyte.com/latest/contribute/core-database/bu... . > What do I mean by Fake Open Source? A project that has a large percentage of its contributors beholden to a single organization/entity to me is not…
Fair point re: "someone has to start the project". I think Yugabyte is neat, and I want to invest in it as a platform, but I can't help but look at the project and feel like it's not set up for success should the Yugabyte the company fail. I hope I'm wrong and in 10 years it looks something like the Postgres community. I also did eventually find the docs for building the database. It just feels odd to have a roadmap…
Probably true as of now. But they have enough funds for some time to seed the project in the worst case scenario.
> It just feels odd to have a roadmap in the readme but no actual information for getting set up on development
Because 99% of developers just want to use it instead of contribute in c++. And the docs are pretty big. We'll include a link for contributors/building docs in the readme.
It takes like 10 years to create a new database ready for production. And not everyone can contribute a quick patch to it, it needs some extensive skills.
But we're extremely open to outside contributors. And we've accepted fixes/features outside of the roadmap. And the license is free enough that you can build a competitor with it.
Source: I work there.
I run a couple of Postgres databases on cheap linux VMs, for various projects, and they have been running smoothly for years. The only problem I had was two times when the disk was full. If I had multiple nodes they would all have been full...
Github has been down more often than my Postgres databases.
HA adds so much complexity and tradeoffs that I would really think hard about wether it's worth it for your use case.
Jbtw, the risk of nodes dying is quite exaggerated. DO/Vultr/Linode all provide 99.99% up time