Great stuff but this name really doesn’t work. Make it a name with positive connotations.
While we are changing names for petty reasons, let's rename Python to something else, since a sizeable part of the population has a phobia of snakes.
CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
151–160 of 187 posts
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#152Earlier quoted context omitted.
My Org/team is too conservative to use this is they have to hire ops and too froogle to use spanner.
Why do you think that hosted cochroachdb would be cheaper then hosted spanner? Google has been optimizing spanner performance for years so I would expect that it will be cheaper to run for quite a while. Of course the markup can be different but I wouldn't expect it to make a huge difference.
Maybe training? Spanner's lack of UPDATE/INSERT/DELETE requires a team that's trained pretty specifically on how it works.
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#153How is this meaningful without detailed setup description? http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_results.asp?print=false... Looking at this list of results one wonders what those results actually mean?
I think you can still drive some insights. I clicked on the TPC-C results you shared and read their executive summaries. The Oracle on SPARC cluster (at the top, 2010) performs 30.2M qualified tx/min vs the 16K tx/min in this blog post. The Oracle cluster also costs $30M, which is clearly higher than the Cockroach cluster's cost. That said, the TPC-C benchmark is new to me. Happy to update this comment if I'm misread…
The open-source (GPLv2) MySQL Cluster (distributed in-memory database - not InnoDB, but NDB) got 200m reads/second (and about 60m writes/sec) on commodity servers:
http://mikaelronstrom.blogspot.se/2015/03/200m-reads-per-sec...
My guess is that the benchmark setup would cost about 1m dollars to install (3 racks of commodity servers). The software is free. Naturally, Oracle aren't pushing this, when they charge 10s of millions for Oracle rack :)
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#154Earlier quoted context omitted.
From OP's description > issues a write every time someone types into a text field With more than a handful of people, this is getting into conflict territory pretty rapidly, especially if the document is structured as a single row (hopefully it's more granular than that). Time for some back of the envelope maths: Assuming that an average person types at around 200 words per minute (number pulled from https://www.live…
Perhaps it's event sourcing based. Every time someone types into a field it writes a row that something was typed which is a record of what was typed. Play it back and you have the full document with no conflicts.
With the caveat that the stored events are not conflicting with each other. So a central instance needs to check each event for validity before allowing it into the log. The check cannot be parallelized easily without introducing races between event insertions.
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#155Great stuff but this name really doesn’t work. Make it a name with positive connotations.
I think it's a great name once you get the.. uh.. pun behind it.
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#156Earlier quoted context omitted.
A couple of our use-cases include: good KV access (stored user data etc.) and listing blocks of data that has been pre-sorted on disk at insert time (leaderboard records, chat message history etc.). As well, the clustering technology is particularly useful at scale. We work in the games space with some very large games in production, which allows us to spread the load across multiple database nodes and offers us peac…
What do you mean by KV access isn't it a relational data store? do you store the value as a blog? json? if so how do you then do queries on that value's values?
IIRC it's a KV store which offer a relational data store interface for usability/compability
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#157Great stuff but this name really doesn’t work. Make it a name with positive connotations.
I agree, the unfortunately clever/punny name will detract from potential consideration based on illogical human subconscious thinking.
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#158Does someone have more information about how they implemented serializable in such a way that, as they claim, performance isn't negatively impacted? Seems pretty hard to achieve that.
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#159Earlier quoted context omitted.
We have a collaborative, Google Docs-like application that currently issues a write every time someone types into a text field. Now, clearly it's suboptimal and something that should be optimized to batch the updates, but on the other hand, with Postgres we've had zero incentive to make such an optimization, because it's able to handle thousands of writes per node in real time with no queuing happening on the client.…
Lordy, relational databases are not the way to go for that problem... With a single shared resource (document), you're going to be encountering write conflicts left and right. Have you explored implementing a CRDT based solution like WOOT instead?
He's saying it works. Why change it if it works?
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#160Earlier quoted context omitted.
What do you mean by KV access isn't it a relational data store? do you store the value as a blog? json? if so how do you then do queries on that value's values?
IIRC it's a KV store which offer a relational data store interface for usability/compability
[deleted]