111–120 of 135 posts
It seems to be the case with all the NewSQL databases that they're still just not economical to run unless you are FAANG. Get a Bigtable / HBase / etc and build a custom system and save $50-350K per month. For a sub 100 person company, it's a no-brainer.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Vitess is an additional layer on top of MySQL which all queries pass though. Among other things, it implements its own query parser which can then do stuff like split a query across shards and join results etc. I wouldn't say there's too much "magic" in there, but it does a lot of known difficult things (schema management, sharding/resharding, connection pooling, query optimization, DB administration, monitoring, bac…
I do think it’s funny that whenever these ‘magic’ products appear. It always turns out that they’re just packaging the accepted best method in a way that’s easy to consume.
Does a full table scan count as a read? Is there planetscale specific tooling for managing indexes or primary keys?
Can someone please explain how Vitess works, in plain English? How does it magically make MySQL scale? And then what does PlanetScale add on top of Vitess hosted anywhere else? Sorry, the linked blog post is both very abstract and assumes a high level of preexisting knowledge about database scaling.
As I understand it, Vitess is basically a really powerful sharding system, which goes a step further than typical sharding solutions by basically making the shards one or more unique databases. In the case of someone like slack, because your tenant (e.g your company slack), is completely isolated from other tenants, you can treat that basically as its own database, and have a master for just that DB, allowing much be…
You always need a lot of attention to sharding otherwise you'll have poor performance.
Before GitHub launched, I built some large eCommerce sites, and for a vcs we used CVS, and then Subversion. We had a person on our team with the title of release manager, because branching in Subversion, and merging back to make releases, was a specialist effort that took time, patience, and managing a tremendous amount of fighting between teams of what features and fixes could even be merged together in order to shi…
An ORM/migration system like ActiveRecord makes schema changes pretty simple.... hardly outside the domain of "mere mortal" engineer
> Developers want the durability, stability, and scalability of a SQL database but do not want to be constrained by managing a schema Speak for yourself. I love my schemas. This article is also 100% fluff, and zero actual information. Obviously I won’t sign up to anything without an ounce of information being provided up front.
> Developers want the durability, stability, and scalability of a SQL database but do not want to be constrained by managing a schema Speak for yourself. I love my schemas. This article is also 100% fluff, and zero actual information. Obviously I won’t sign up to anything without an ounce of information being provided up front.
Haha that's actually a good point. I love to have a reference for how my data is structured.
I'm currently searching for a serverless database for my next project and will look into it. I already played around with Upstash and Fauna. Somehow the signup shows an 422 error, then I get an confirmation email that leads to a blank page.