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

The race to replace Redis

lwn.net

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

471–480 of 520 posts

Re: The race to replace Redis

#471

Post by sangnoir »

ufocia wrote: post #401
mort96 wrote: post #389

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I for one don't like it when companies do a bait-and-switch. It's fine to develop proprietary software, the problem is when you grow a user/customer base based on the fact that your software is open source and then turn it proprietary.

Trust no one. Be self sufficient. I, for one, will take the risk, reap the benefits and move on when factors are no longer conducive to my goals.

So I take it you endorse the Amazon-backed fork? Amazon too strives to be self-sufficient, and has moved on from Redis because the factors are no longer conducive to its goals.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#472

Post by kazinator »

palata wrote: post #255
kazinator wrote: post #168

Earlier quoted context omitted.

I see that it is. So then I don't see what the hoopla is about at all. The software is all there. Some dickheads forked a proprietary version. They got the name, which will be their consolation prize in their voyage to irrelevance; nice knowing you. Meanwhile, what everyone uses marches on.

I believe that the hoopla is about the CLA. It feels immoral for an open source project to accept contributions but require a CLA, and later change the license for all those contributions that were never compensated.

If a GPL-ed project requires copyright transfers and then spins a proprietary version, it makes sense for people to be upset.

But Redis was BSD or BSD-like, no? Proprietary forks can happen with or without CLA, so it is moot.

I would say rather the opposite. If a developer contributes to a BSD (or similar) licensed program (under that same license of course), then at that point they are letting anyone anywhere do whatever they want with the code, as long as copyright notices are preserved. Then, if someone forks a proprietary version of the program (in a way that complies with that developer's license for those files) and that developer gets upset and tries to revoke the copyright license, that developer is the bad actor, not the forkster.

In the context of BSD-like permissive licenses, requirments for CLA, I think, would only be a form of legal safeguard against such situations, where people change their mind.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#473

Post by evanelias »

rad_gruchalski wrote: post #467
evanelias wrote: post #437

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That's fair in isolation, but one can justifiably argue that a repeated pattern of behavior is clearly predatory. Specifically: have the major cloud providers ever created a successful FOSS database, cache, or fulltext search index project from the ground up ? By this I mean, a FOSS project with its own protocol, own community from scratch, not a fork or a re-implementation or based on another FOSS project, nor a lat…

> That's fair in isolation, but one can justifiably argue that a repeated pattern of behavior is clearly predatory. Yes, but there’s another explanation. Repeating the same mistake countless times and expecting a different outcome is naivety.

To repeat a comment by another user upthread: hence the relicensing.

I suppose I’m not understanding the point of your position. Software authors cannot fix a licensing mistake by changing the past, but they can use a different license moving forwards.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#474

Post by fransje26 »

ajmurmann wrote: post #115
crasshit wrote: post #78

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> without paying any sort of compensation to the redis developers. Redis organization doesn't pay any sort of compensation to developers who contribute to redis source code. I do not see any difference here.

Doesn't Redis Labs employ paid contributors? Does Amazon donate their contributions back to the community?

> Does Amazon donate their contributions back to the community?

If they contributed to 5% of the code, and the code is open-source, then yes?

Re: The race to replace Redis

#475

Post by fransje26 »

lenerdenator wrote: post #447
brody_hamer wrote: post #48

It wasn’t clear to me until I read their blog, that redis will remain free to use in their “community edition”, which will continue to be supported and maintained (and improved!) So we as developers don’t have to scramble to replace redis in our SAAS apps and web based software. This is more about preventing AWS from eating their lunch by providing redis-as-a-service, without paying any sort of compensation to the re…

The problem with this is, it's virtually impossible to compete against the FOSS trunk that your now-closed-source software branched off of, or FOSS clones of it. Low-end proprietary UNIXes got wiped out by GNU/Linux and the BSDs, for example. Amazon, Google, MS, and all the rest easily have the talent and resources to create a Redis replacement with code that already exists. They'll do so because it is to their advan…

How to saw off the branch you are sitting on..

> Amazon, Google, MS, and all the rest easily have the talent and resources to create a Redis replacement with code that already exists.

And they most possibly will. Goodbye, and thank you for the fish!

Re: The race to replace Redis

#476

Post by secondcoming »

pimsn3000 wrote: post #455
secondcoming wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

KeyDB is flaky garbage

Please explain

We got hit by [0] and so had to pin to an older version (we didn't raise the issue).

Also, just look at the amount of open bugs and their age [1]

They also recommend using swap for some reason, however if your memory usage reaches the point where swap is being used the performance is so bad that the machine may as well be dead.

It's been nothing but trouble, which is a shame because the changes they've done to redis have crossed my mind too. We'll probably move to Scylla.

[0] https://github.com/Snapchat/KeyDB/issues/465

[1] https://github.com/Snapchat/KeyDB/issues

Re: The race to replace Redis

#477

Post by secondcoming »

hardwaresofton wrote: post #450
secondcoming wrote: post #343

Earlier quoted context omitted.

KeyDB is flaky garbage

Whoaaaa I’d love some details on this reaction, do you have any stories or anecdotes to share? I have to say I’ve never hit its limits so I’ve never lost trust in it

https://news.ycombinator.com/threads?id=secondcoming#3986566...

Re: The race to replace Redis

#478

Post by duskwuff »

BoorishBears wrote: post #282
duskwuff wrote: post #251

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Query autocomplete is a feature of the Kibana web interface, not of the ElasticSearch database itself. Which isn't to say that it isn't useful, but it's more of a niche utility than a core feature of the stack.

Maybe you're unaware OpenSearch covers Kibana's functionality via OpenSearch-Dashboards? Just like the rest of X-Pack under OpenDistro pre-name change It's not exactly a niche utility for observability unless you plan on hand searching hundreds of fields. But of course see my other comment for a list of the other observability fumbles they've made. Elastic chose a pretty great time to start to give observability atte…

What I'm getting at here is that there are use cases for ElasticSearch/OpenSearch beyond log collection and analysis; many of them don't involve Kibana at all.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#479

Post by datavirtue »

alex_duf wrote: post #300
radicalbyte wrote: post #233

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Amazon / Google / Microsoft made a massive mistake by not hiring Antirez, it's chump change for them to throw him $1-2M a year at him so he can work on Redis for them full time.

I mean I love redis, but Amazon Google and Microsoft all probably have readily available in memory key/value stores at hand. Throw a little money and they can make it redis compatible, so we wouldn't have to re-write any code. Redis is great as an off-the shelf component, but it's not exactly rocket science to re-implement for a big corporation. So redis doesn't really have any leverage in my opinion.

Already done. We are talking about a key/value store here. I don't get what all the histrionics is about.

Re: The race to replace Redis

#480

Post by bruce511 »

coldtea wrote: post #262
bruce511 wrote: post #108

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Which is not inherently surprising. Developers need a salary to pay the bills. Let's say that covers the first 40 hours of the week. Those who are searching for significance outside their day job offer free labor as their "hobby". Maybe 10 hours a week? For projects that want to move forward with some velocity it makes sense to make some of that development into paid day-jobs. As projects get very large, there's a fa…

Those turtles didn't need to use funding pre-doc-com-boom, they were passion projects and people with time devoted to the "cause" of FOSS. > This is the cognitive dissonance that underpins OSS development. The very people OSS treat as the "enemy" are the people funding OSS in the first place. As much as say RMS rails against big tech, Linux and the rich Linux economy system only exist at the level they do -because- o…

>> Those turtles didn't need to use funding pre-doc-com-boom, they were passion projects and people with time devoted to the "cause" of FOSS.

Except they kinda did. The foundations of FSF are born by academics working at institutions, getting paid salaries. The were devoting time certainly, and certainly in the case of RMS with passion and cause, but that work was definitely funded - usually by the university.

>> Perhaps that's the problem: that they exist "at the level they do", meaning most of it is corporate focused, and not enthusiast and user focused.

I think we can drop the term "enthusiast". It implies tiny niche group with little practical value. I'm thinking of classic car "enthusiasts" who spend all their time under the car, and precious little driving it.

So let's talk about users. Users want full-featured reliable software. I would suggest all software, if successful, is user focused. (To he honest, I'm not sure what you have in mind with "corporate focused".) Firefox, to pick one project at random will seemingly live or die based on the individual user experience.

Equally take databases - there are s plethora of options to suit every use case. Need big powerful fast enterprise scale - Postgres is for you. Need small footprint with easy install - try Firebird. And a gazillion others. Surely such quality is a good thing?

>> Gnome, for example, wasn't created to give RH and co a desktop shell for corporate installs...

Um. Sure it was. It was designed to offer a gui desktop on top of Linux. Who did they think would use it if not Linux distributions? Given that for decades "the year of Linux on the desktop" was a meme, I'm not sure it's fair to claim that distributions using Gnome to create desktops for business users was a surprise.

Post reply on HN