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

Membase a new NoSQL

membase.org

Post reply on HN
Print view View original

21–30 of 46 posts

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#21

Post by ergo98 »

wmf wrote: post #20
ergo98 wrote: post #16

It's unfortunate there are no Windows binaries (well apparently there are no binaries yet period, but I mean they don't plan on binaries until some time out). We could host Linux VMs, but ideally we just run Windows binaries and get rid of the abstraction. That is the case for a large number of these products. At best offering a terrible Cygwin port. In the Windows world the premiere product right now is the beta of…

Porting software to a completely different culture isn't cheap and there's little incentive for volunteer open source projects to do it. If enough software that you want isn't available on Windows, it's probably cheaper for you to learn Unix.

Where did I say I didn't know Unix? The problem is that for some deployed solutions adding in Linux boxes simply because they host one piece of software isn't optimal, so "native" solutions are chosen instead. We aren't talking about a product that is tightly coupled with the OS (or at least it shouldn't be).

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#22

Post by jbooth »

ergo98 wrote: post #21
wmf wrote: post #20

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Porting software to a completely different culture isn't cheap and there's little incentive for volunteer open source projects to do it. If enough software that you want isn't available on Windows, it's probably cheaper for you to learn Unix.

Where did I say I didn't know Unix? The problem is that for some deployed solutions adding in Linux boxes simply because they host one piece of software isn't optimal, so "native" solutions are chosen instead. We aren't talking about a product that is tightly coupled with the OS (or at least it shouldn't be).

It should be, actually, if it's going to be fast. Memcached is fast because it optimizes interaction with the I/O layers -- you can't stay portable if you do that.

EDIT: Actually, you can use libevent for some subset of these cases and get speed+portability, but I'm pretty sure memcached predates libevent by quite a bit so they're not. So there's your answer.

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#24

Post by siculars »

ergo98 wrote: post #16

It's unfortunate there are no Windows binaries (well apparently there are no binaries yet period, but I mean they don't plan on binaries until some time out). We could host Linux VMs, but ideally we just run Windows binaries and get rid of the abstraction. That is the case for a large number of these products. At best offering a terrible Cygwin port. In the Windows world the premiere product right now is the beta of…

Your post is just another nail in the MS coffin. The simple fact is that the latest, greatest hotness is just not playing in the MS ecosystem. Virtually all NoSQL systems support windows as an afterthought if at all. Not to mention hotness like nodejs.

The bottom line is that the people who make the new shinnies just don't play on MS boxes and could care less if their toys ever play on MS boxes. No, I'm not talking 'enterprise'.

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#25

Post by sqrt17 »

wvenable wrote: post #2

"For those familiar with memcached, membase provides on-the-wire protocol compatibility, but adds disk persistence; hierarchical storage management; data replication; live cluster reconfiguration and rebalancing; and secure multi-tenancy with data partitioning. Like memcached, membase is simple, fast and elastic." I bet a lot of large sites using multiple memcached servers would find this interesting.

... as in, those people who use memcachedb but would like to have something bigger?

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#26

Post by sqrt17 »

p3ll0n wrote: post #17

The key/value model embraced by NoSQL databases (Scalaris, Voldemort, Tokyo Cabinet, etc) is the simplest and easiest to implement but inefficient when you are only interested in querying or updating part of a value. This article ( http://seattleweb.intel-research.net/people/lamarca/pubs/pap... ) coming out of Intel argues that it is also difficult to implement more sophisticated structures on top of a distributed ke…

I for one like the concept of storing JSON-like data structures and using javascript-based indices on top of that, like you can do with CouchDB or MongoDB. For the greater part, having something where you can store big amorphous blobs is much less useful than something where you can (a) work on a standard format (usable at least from Java and Python) and (b) use some indices to speed up access via selected attributes.

For a project of mine, I've setup something where the frontend (i.e. javascript) munches on some data structures, which are then passed on to the backend (some Python code for business logic and authentification) which sticks them into the database more or less directly. Works really well, although MongoDB still has this "embrace of the exotic stranger" feeling (i.e., you wonder when exactly your database will stop to like you and just crash), whereas CouchDB is just too slow for my purposes.

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#27

Post by JoachimSchipper »

jbooth wrote: post #22
ergo98 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did I say I didn't know Unix? The problem is that for some deployed solutions adding in Linux boxes simply because they host one piece of software isn't optimal, so "native" solutions are chosen instead. We aren't talking about a product that is tightly coupled with the OS (or at least it shouldn't be).

It should be, actually, if it's going to be fast. Memcached is fast because it optimizes interaction with the I/O layers -- you can't stay portable if you do that. EDIT: Actually, you can use libevent for some subset of these cases and get speed+portability, but I'm pretty sure memcached predates libevent by quite a bit so they're not. So there's your answer.

The first commit to memcached on github is http://github.com/memcached/memcached/tree/32f382b605b4565bd..., which uses libevent. libevent has been around for a while...

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#28

Post by dlsspy »

pcarmichael wrote: post #10

The timing for me is interesting as I was just about to start up a cassandra setup here. This might be a better fit for my particular needs if I could get it running. Unfortunately, I'm having a difficult time figuring out where to start. A general getting started guide would be very helpful. - The FAQ on membase.org is empty and the wiki does not appear to be populated with much content (i.e. 'Directions for working…

Thanks for reporting the FF issue. The site's been updated and tested again.

We've obviously got a bit to go from our internal build farms to things that are easier for other contributors to play with. Documentation for developers is still being written.

Forgetting everything we know about the things we've been doing for a while so we can explain it to people who haven't been doing it has proven to be a bit harder than we initially thought. :)

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#29

Post by reynolds »

jbooth wrote: post #22
ergo98 wrote: post #21

Earlier quoted context omitted.

Where did I say I didn't know Unix? The problem is that for some deployed solutions adding in Linux boxes simply because they host one piece of software isn't optimal, so "native" solutions are chosen instead. We aren't talking about a product that is tightly coupled with the OS (or at least it shouldn't be).

It should be, actually, if it's going to be fast. Memcached is fast because it optimizes interaction with the I/O layers -- you can't stay portable if you do that. EDIT: Actually, you can use libevent for some subset of these cases and get speed+portability, but I'm pretty sure memcached predates libevent by quite a bit so they're not. So there's your answer.

memcached actually uses libevent.

Edit: oops, JoachimSchipper beat me to it

Re: Membase a new NoSQL

#30

Post by dlsspy »

leej wrote: post #14

* there are alternatives but the backers give this project one up. * web site needs a significant overhaul. * this was a commercial product, if i am not mistaken, and just recently opened up. * is this forked off memcached or just another NoSQL with memcached compatibility is still a mystery.

It's not a fork. We've done a lot of work on memcached to allow it to support multiple backends on the same network interface. Part of membase is a new memcached backend.
Post reply on HN