31–40 of 153 posts
This is in such a thick academic style that it is difficult to follow what the problem actually might be and how it would impact someone. This style of writing serves mostly to remind me that I am not a part of the world that writes like this, which makes me a little sad.
[flagged]
I thought this kind of bullshit was only supposed to happen in MongoDB!
I was worried I had made the wrong move upgrading major versions, but it looks like this is not that. This is not a regression, but just a feature request or longstanding bug.
The submitted title buries the lede: RDS for PostgreSQL 17.4 does not properly implement snapshot isolation.
Well this is from Kyle Kingsbury, the Chuck Norris of transactional guarantees. AWS has to reply or clarify, even if only seems to apply to Multi-AZ Clusters. Those are one of the two possibilities for RDS with Postgres. Multi-AZ deployments can have one standby or two standby DB instances and this is for the two standby DB instances. [1]
They make no such promises in their documentation. Their 5494 pages manual on RDS hardly mentions isolation or serializable except in documentation of parameters for the different engines.
Nothing on global read consistency for Multi-AZ clusters because why should they.... :-) They talk about semi-synchronous replication so the writer waits for one standby to confirm log record, but the two readers can be on different snapshots?
[1] - "New Amazon RDS for MySQL & PostgreSQL Multi-AZ Deployment Option: Improved Write Performance & Faster Failover" - https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/aws/amazon-rds-multi-az-db-clus...
[2] - "Amazon RDS Multi-AZ with two readable standbys: Under the hood" - https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/database/amazon-rds-multi-az-wi...
This is in such a thick academic style that it is difficult to follow what the problem actually might be and how it would impact someone. This style of writing serves mostly to remind me that I am not a part of the world that writes like this, which makes me a little sad.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The result is for “Amazon RDS for PostgreSQL multi-AZ clusters” which are certainly a distributed system. I’m not well versed in RDS but I believe that clustered is the only way to use it.
No, you can have single instances
This is in such a thick academic style that it is difficult to follow what the problem actually might be and how it would impact someone. This style of writing serves mostly to remind me that I am not a part of the world that writes like this, which makes me a little sad.
In the beginning, when you read papers like this, it can be hard work. You can either give up or put some effort in to try to understand it. Maybe look at some of the other Jepsen reports, some may be easier. Or perhaps an introductory CS textbook. With practice and patience it will become easier to read and eventually write like this. You may not be part of that world now, but you can be some day. EDIT: forgot to sa…
I somewhat feel that there was a generation that had it easier, because they were pioneers in a new field, allowing them to become experts quickly, while improving year-on-year, being paid well in the process, and having great network and exposure.
Of course, it can be done, but we should at least acknowledge that sometimes the industry is unforgiving and simply doesn't have on-ramps except for the privileged few.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Do people still use MongoDB in production? I was quite surprised to read that Stripe uses MongoDB in the early days and still today and I can't imagine the sheer nightmares they must have faced using it for all these years.
mongodb is a public company with a market cap of 14.2 billion dollars. so yes, people still use it in production
Literally the only job ad I've seen talking about MongoDB was a job ad for MongoDB itself.
This is in such a thick academic style that it is difficult to follow what the problem actually might be and how it would impact someone. This style of writing serves mostly to remind me that I am not a part of the world that writes like this, which makes me a little sad.
It's maximal information communication. Use LLM to distill to your own knowledge level. It is trivial with modern LLM. Very good output in general.