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

DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

deepstreamhub.com

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 45 posts

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#21

Post by salduncan »

marknadal wrote: post #19
devmunchies wrote: post #12

Earlier quoted context omitted.

> Or else we'll be the only company that is fully Open Source (replication, auto failover, etc.) major humble-bragging. In bad taste to do that in an announcement for a "competitor"?

That is a sad way to spin it :( but being strongly values-focused is a good thing not a bad thing, and inviting open discussion with competitors improves both systems, not diminishes it. Silencing discussion hinders progress.

I don't think there is much spin going on here. Your original comment has a pretty obvious agenda.

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#22

Post by akanet »

Sujan wrote: post #2

What exactly can be replaced with DeepstreamHub if your are using Firebase right now?

I've recently talked with Wolfram about this, but currently I use Firebase mostly with the Firepad library, Deepstream is missing:

* a better presence story * a better story around adding data to a list and subscribing to changes to specific parts of it

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#23

Post by SEJeff »

eloff wrote: post #10
marknadal wrote: post #6

Competitor here, please don't become an "open core" company - "Open Core" = "Crippleware". Here is my thoughts/arguments around it, dealing with the RethinkDB and Parse shut down as well: https://hackernoon.com/the-implications-of-rethinkdb-and-par... Plus, was invited to speak about it on the Changelog Podcast: https://changelog.com/podcast/236 Please stay truly open :) that way we can still compete. ;) Or else we'l…

Leaving aside how odd it is to see a "competitor" give business model advice, open core is a perfectly fine open-source business model. Pure support based models, with very few exceptions, leave too much % of value on the table to make a strong business. Purely closed models take away too many freedoms from the customer (but can be very successful nonetheless.) Open core is a very reasonable compromise. The problem w…

I tend to agree with the OP and think very similarly along these lines:

https://blogs.gnome.org/bolsh/2010/07/19/rotten-to-the-open-...

A purely services based model is difficult, but so is open core. With open core you compete against yourself. Look no further than Nginx as an example and how lousy it is to do things like say a http healthcheck of HEAD /status. In haproxy it is trivial, it can be done in nginx plus, but not the oss version (at least it wasn't supported in any of the versions I tried a year ago sans the commercial version). When you compete against yourself you get put in a difficult situation "Does this valuable user contribution to my OSS project compete with my commercial fork?" and that is just all around a bad situation to be in for the community and for the company.

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#24

Post by dbnoch »

lima wrote: post #9
newsat13 wrote: post #5

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Interesting, I though horizon is dead (because Rethink went down). Last news I heard was them going with LF but haven't seen much updates after that

Give it some time.

Can you provide more information regarding this reply? My opinion is if a service goes dark, I probably shouldn't consider using it.

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#25

Post by redka »

Not exactly Firebase in that it doesn't provide an arbitrarily nested JSON structure as a datastore but more of a document-based approach. Overall a pretty good alternative to Firebase but there is no security rules, no default data store or auth so you need a lot more work. Lists are not very good being just a record with an array of record keys and not the actual data. I use the self-hosted version (deepstream.io) at work where we can't use Firebase because of company policy and regulations.

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#26

Post by mwcampbell »

srikz wrote: post #20

So, is this equivalent of Realm Mobile Platform[1]? I found realm to be convenient to use in mobile apps. Haven't tried the mobile platform yet. Anyone here can give a quick comparison of RMP and DeepstreamHub? [1]: https://realm.io/products/realm-mobile-platform/

They're quite different. In particular, the Realm Mobile Platform is built on a full-blown database running on the user's device. One of Realm's biggest selling points is offline-first applications. As far as I can tell, this is not the case with Deepstream.

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#27

Post by craighosang »

mwcampbell wrote: post #26
srikz wrote: post #20

So, is this equivalent of Realm Mobile Platform[1]? I found realm to be convenient to use in mobile apps. Haven't tried the mobile platform yet. Anyone here can give a quick comparison of RMP and DeepstreamHub? [1]: https://realm.io/products/realm-mobile-platform/

They're quite different. In particular, the Realm Mobile Platform is built on a full-blown database running on the user's device. One of Realm's biggest selling points is offline-first applications. As far as I can tell, this is not the case with Deepstream.

Just to build on what mwcampbell said (and in full disclosure, I'm on the team at Realm).

Architecturally, Realm and DeepstreamHub are quite different. Realm at its core is a distributed object database that updates changes to objects in realtime. DeepstreamHub, as far as I can tell, relies on a pub/sub and request/response architecture. They are two fundamentally different approaches to the challenge of realtime.

One of the biggest advantages with Realm is that you work with your objects in your native programming language, there's no JSON or ORMs to deal with, just your live objects that update automatically in the local datastore as changes are made on another sync'd client or on the server.

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#28

Post by katowulf »

salduncan wrote: post #21
marknadal wrote: post #19

Earlier quoted context omitted.

That is a sad way to spin it :( but being strongly values-focused is a good thing not a bad thing, and inviting open discussion with competitors improves both systems, not diminishes it. Silencing discussion hinders progress.

I don't think there is much spin going on here. Your original comment has a pretty obvious agenda.

We all have agendas; being obvious is a refreshing change.

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#29

Post by [deleted] »

redka wrote: post #25

Not exactly Firebase in that it doesn't provide an arbitrarily nested JSON structure as a datastore but more of a document-based approach. Overall a pretty good alternative to Firebase but there is no security rules, no default data store or auth so you need a lot more work. Lists are not very good being just a record with an array of record keys and not the actual data. I use the self-hosted version (deepstream.io)…

[deleted]

Re: DeepstreamHub: a faster Firebase with an open core

#30

Post by sorenbs »

redka wrote: post #25

Not exactly Firebase in that it doesn't provide an arbitrarily nested JSON structure as a datastore but more of a document-based approach. Overall a pretty good alternative to Firebase but there is no security rules, no default data store or auth so you need a lot more work. Lists are not very good being just a record with an array of record keys and not the actual data. I use the self-hosted version (deepstream.io)…

Deepstream is a great product, but not exactly firebase. For anybody looking for a fully fledged platform to replace firebase, that's exactly what we are targeting with https://www.graph.cool
Post reply on HN