391–400 of 756 posts
Why so much negativity? I find these projects interesting for learning purposes and exploring new ways. What’s wrong with that?
I don't really understand how "written by AI" and "for learning purposes" can ever be compatible. What exactly does one learn from typing "Rewrite this in Rust, make no mistakes" into a terminal?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Code is code. It either does the job or doesn't. If there is nothing that could convince you that AI generated code is trustworthy (for whatever definition of trust) then this is an article of faith, not a rational position.
> Code is code. It either does the job or doesn't. Surely that is not the only dimension that matters when evaluating software. Maintainability and readability, for example, are crucial for any long-lived project.
Why so much negativity? I find these projects interesting for learning purposes and exploring new ways. What’s wrong with that?
1. Piggybacking established brand names (Postgres + Rust)
2. … without practicality nor advancement (e.g. this solves no extra problems)
3. … without trust (i.e. LLM-driven rewrite, with no capabilities to thoroughly review it)
I think people get easily upset when the title has high-signal names like Postgres, and the title touts it somehow, yet it’s obviously impractical for obvious reasons (short-/long-term practicality, social trust & network effect, etc)
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Is there any measurable difference in quality between the two, or are you just going on "vibes"? Is there a correlation between the quality of the manually written code and AI generated code driven by the same dev? Such crude takes only cause unnecessary friction. If you have a black box that spits out code, and you are unable to distinguish the quality between a top tier dev and an AI inside the black box, then the…
Didn't the initial rewrite of Bun into Rust have an ocean of "unsafe" in it, and wasn't it entirely dysfunctional?
I start to see a lot of these re-writes that depend on tests to state that its working. But the things that make software like Postgres and SQLite reliable are not mostly the test, but the real world production scars. That's where the reliability comes from, years and years of running in production.
"Mom, can I have battle-tested, reliable software"
"We have battle-tested, reliable software at home"
Battle-tested, reliable software at home: (Pic of green text from `cargo test`)
Why should a developer use this for anything beyond a pet project? Just because it is written in Rust? All these "rewritten in rust" projects only reinforce the idea that a significant part of the rust community consists of software talibans and not of engineers who must deliver something that works and is reliable over time.
If you are watching this and haven't used rust: Please don't judge the language by this part of its users.
Hey author here. Wasn't expecting to see this up. To concisely give an overview of the project, I've been experimenting with using LLMs to build a better version of Postgres. Postgres is 30 years old and we've learned a lot about databases since hten. A lot of the techniques that work for doing a rewrite are also useful for doing a rearchitecture. I'm now working on a new, not yet published version of pgrust that inc…
Ouf. I don't know. I don't want to call you out without evidence -- I myself make benchmark claims all the time -- but 50% improvement in OLTP seems suspicious. I get that you used a standard benchmark, and I don't even know what it entails, but my spidey sense is going off. Perhaps, some trade off somewhere that won't make it to prod because it breaks MVCC -- and yes, I saw that it passes regression tests. Just chec…
If those don't exist, I hope folks recognize how useful they are and add them.
I suspect the future of open source will be to never publish your tests. Or someone will just pump them into an LLM like this.
These are toy projects with no serious interest in maintaining the port long term. and even with things like bun where the port is merged it remains to be seen on maintainability over time.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A mixture of threads and processes that can be used to match processors, disk I/O, and network interfaces. A very long time ago, there was once a feature called "Data Blades" which tanked a commercial database vendor. A badly behaving blade could bring down the entire database. Most anyone who has been working on databases for a few decades remembers this and makes a point of either not introducing these sorts of fea…
> A very long time ago, there was once a feature called "Data Blades" which tanked a commercial database vendor. I have no idea what this is and a web search turned up Harbor Freight woodworking tools.
And what you found seems to be "Dado", not "Data".