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

Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

altinity.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

61–70 of 70 posts

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#61

Post by kuchenbecker »

atwong wrote: post #52
benjaminwootton wrote: post #17

This would be a shame and also a mistake in my opinion. Clickhouse is instantly differentiated from Snowflake, Databricks, BigQuery and RedShift with the open source offering that you can deploy yourself. There are lots of other options but Clickhouse has the most mindshare and is the techies choice. I find myself rooting for them and recommending them for that before you even get into any technical comparison.

All the main players in Clickhouse's space like Apache Pinot, Apache Druid, StarRocks, PrestoDB all have mindshare and unicorns using their products. It sounds like you haven't seen whats happening in this space.

Trino, not Presto.

Presto, created by FB, was required to let any FB engineer merge without OWNERS (because Facebook doesn't have OWNERS files unless it would create a SEV1).

Subsequently, original creators of Presto forked it to PrestoSQL.

So Facebook trademarked the name Presto.

So creators renamed it Trino.

https://trino.io/blog/2020/12/27/announcing-trino.html

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#62

Post by nnurmanov »

jwatte wrote: post #40
nnurmanov wrote: post #38

Here is a similar Thin-Crust Open Core model https://reactflow.dev/blog/asking-for-money-for-open-source/ . But I hear CH and understand their move. I think OSS Sponsorship has failed; it does not generate enough money to pay a team of top engineers. The best move would have been to implement better paid support model and allow more users to pay for support. Currently CH charges immense amount for their support, so o…

But if they had a cheaper support model, the large corporations would also pay less, and they'd make even less money overall. Not to mention: support engineers are expensive, and researching tickets take a lot of time.

Not sure, you can have more customers but fixed number of issues. I am researching into it. You may crowdsource issue solving and have revenue sharing enabled.

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#63

Post by jabart »

hodgesrm wrote: post #49
jabart wrote: post #42

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Yeah, its the don't treat S3 like a disk issue. I'm looking at S3 only for cold storage but need AWS VPC Gateway Endpoint support for S3 access since we are on-premise. *Yes you can use a vpc gateway but need public IPs to waste to setup the BGP/IP routes.

What's the "AWS VPC Gateway Endpoint" support you refer to? Do you mean an S3 proxy? If so one of our PRs that just merged may be helpful. [0] [0] https://github.com/ClickHouse/ClickHouse/pull/51749

I don't think that will work. Here is the issue logged. This is about a networking feature used for AWS Direct Connect users to access S3 over a dedicated private connection.

https://github.com/ClickHouse/ClickHouse/issues/53761#issuec...

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#64

Post by hodgesrm »

jabart wrote: post #63
hodgesrm wrote: post #49

Earlier quoted context omitted.

What's the "AWS VPC Gateway Endpoint" support you refer to? Do you mean an S3 proxy? If so one of our PRs that just merged may be helpful. [0] [0] https://github.com/ClickHouse/ClickHouse/pull/51749

I don't think that will work. Here is the issue logged. This is about a networking feature used for AWS Direct Connect users to access S3 over a dedicated private connection. https://github.com/ClickHouse/ClickHouse/issues/53761#issuec...

Thanks, I had not seen this one.

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#65

Post by ddorian43 »

atwong wrote: post #53
hodgesrm wrote: post #32

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Thanks. That's exactly why we wrote the article. Beyond any commercial considerations, we have worked with ClickHouse for many years and are personally invested in seeing it become the default analytic database worldwide. I believe the best path to that goal is robust support for open source development and distribution.

Lots of other competitors like Apache Pinot, Apache Druid and StarRocks are fighting in that default analytics space.

StarRocks has compute/storage separation in open-source as example.

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#66

Post by unamedrus »

ddorian43 wrote: post #65
atwong wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of other competitors like Apache Pinot, Apache Druid and StarRocks are fighting in that default analytics space.

StarRocks has compute/storage separation in open-source as example.

Not only. Transactions, UPDATES, CBO, Better join optimizations.

It seems that someone is stuck in 2016, when there is no good alternatives for ClickHouse exist in open source.

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#67

Post by PeterCorless »

ddorian43 wrote: post #65
atwong wrote: post #53

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Lots of other competitors like Apache Pinot, Apache Druid and StarRocks are fighting in that default analytics space.

StarRocks has compute/storage separation in open-source as example.

When datasets are small and can easily fit into a single node [a few terabytes], this isn't as much of an issue. Yet when datasets grow far larger, or when compute/QPS needs grow while the dataset grows slower — when either side of the equation does not scale in balanced proportion with each other — that's when this separation of compute & storage becomes vital. [Either that, or you need to find hardware servers or cloud instance types that also support this imbalance of compute & storage, which is sometimes harder to do; it also locks you into a hardware configuration that cannot dynamically scale as needs and workloads change.]

Apache Pinot also offers the same 2-tier compute/storage separation. And it also has nodes for minion [administrative] tasks. Again, these are more issues for larger scale analytical use cases.

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#68

Post by ddorian43 »

PeterCorless wrote: post #67
ddorian43 wrote: post #65

Earlier quoted context omitted.

StarRocks has compute/storage separation in open-source as example.

When datasets are small and can easily fit into a single node [a few terabytes], this isn't as much of an issue. Yet when datasets grow far larger, or when compute/QPS needs grow while the dataset grows slower — when either side of the equation does not scale in balanced proportion with each other — that's when this separation of compute & storage becomes vital. [Either that, or you need to find hardware servers or c…

> Apache Pinot also offers the same 2-tier compute/storage separation.

Based on looking at the docs, I don't think so. Maybe only with HDFS. Feel free to link to a page that says otherwise.

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#69

Post by PeterCorless »

ddorian43 wrote: post #68
PeterCorless wrote: post #67

Earlier quoted context omitted.

When datasets are small and can easily fit into a single node [a few terabytes], this isn't as much of an issue. Yet when datasets grow far larger, or when compute/QPS needs grow while the dataset grows slower — when either side of the equation does not scale in balanced proportion with each other — that's when this separation of compute & storage becomes vital. [Either that, or you need to find hardware servers or c…

> Apache Pinot also offers the same 2-tier compute/storage separation. Based on looking at the docs, I don't think so. Maybe only with HDFS. Feel free to link to a page that says otherwise.

The Brokers are the compute layer. The Servers are the storage later.

Note that this is separate from the fact that the Servers can also be in a tiered storage configuration.

https://docs.pinot.apache.org/basics/architecture

Re: Is ClickHouse Moving Away from Open Source?

#70

Post by foxandmouse »

dartos wrote: post #23
Sphax wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Exactly. I have no problem with open source developers shifting to an open core model so they can get paid, even if it means I as a user don't get these new features for free.

I like what directus does. They release their source code under a restrictive license (you need to pay if you make more than so much money) with a timer. After 3 years of any release the license changes to GPL.

Do you have a source for the After 3 years clause? That's my first-time hearing of it!
Post reply on HN