401–410 of 457 posts
Earlier quoted context omitted.
I talked with them a while back. It's possible now that they're at Google they've changed their back end to work without mongo or whatever, but at least pre-google, that's my understanding.
no, notifications have never worked through oplog watching. It's a custom application layer infront of persistence that sends the mutation transition to registered parties. The oplog is too coarse grained.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
This anti-pattern -- floats as the sole numeric type -- goes all the way back to BASIC in 1964. It's just as bad an idea now as it was then.
The only concrete problem anybody's mentioned with floats is that they only have 53 bits of precision, and some people need their integers to go up to 64 bits, or more.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
If you'd scrolled another 10cm down the page, you would have seen the testimonial from NASA: > At NASA, RethinkDB is radically simplifying how we provide real-time services in support of Extra-Vehicular Activity. -- Collin Estes, Director of Software Engineering, Chief Architect - MRI Technologies Inc. - NASA / ESOC My guess is that RethinkDB failed financially because they had a lot of users but not a lot of custome…
Sorry, how is this possible? Lots of users. Lots of value. But no money? Makes no sense.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The only concrete problem anybody's mentioned with floats is that they only have 53 bits of precision, and some people need their integers to go up to 64 bits, or more.
Here's two actual concrete problems: efficiency and type safety. Indexing an array with "1.5" doesn't seem awesome, nor does using 8 bytes for a double where a 1 byte int would do fine.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
It's licensed under the Affero GPLv3, but I don't think AGPL license requires you to open source your code, if you're just using ReQL (the API/interface for RethinkDB). GPL/AGPL requires you to share your code if you statically (or dynamically) link (which is a C language family concept) to GPL code, but I don't know if calling an API is considered "linking". I don't think most companies really make any contributions…
I've worked in a project that used some AGPL component. There were some many doubts on what should be open-sourced/which licenses were possible that we dropped that component and invested or time modification another one. After some while, that component changed its licensing model. It was too late.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
The GPL is of course completely commerce-friendly, as it permits anyone to resell the original or modifications to it. What you're asking for is a license friendly to proprietary software[1]. Why on earth would they want to enable someone to close his modifications to RethinkDB? How does that make the world a better place? How does that encourage the growth of RethinkDB (vice the proliferation of closed, proprietary…
RethinkDB is licensed AGPL, not GPL.
Why does nobody seem to have any introspection on why RethinkDB failed? Clearly there are some major problems that people re ignoring. If my favorite DB (I must mention Kx Systems once a month) folded, I could give you a laundry list of issues where things went sideways, but all I see is glowing praise and comments about the best tech not always winning (KDB knocks the socks off of everything, but I sure can give you…
> KDB knocks the socks off everything else ...but the licence is 250k dollars a year so big fail for startups.
Why does nobody seem to have any introspection on why RethinkDB failed? Clearly there are some major problems that people re ignoring. If my favorite DB (I must mention Kx Systems once a month) folded, I could give you a laundry list of issues where things went sideways, but all I see is glowing praise and comments about the best tech not always winning (KDB knocks the socks off of everything, but I sure can give you…
Because nobody used it.
For people mourning the loss of rethinkDB, and who are interested in alternative document based NoSQL DBs under development, please checkout ArangoDB. It's my favorite NoSQL database. I have no affiliation with them. Beautiful query language called AQL, and graphing support (multi-model) baked in.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
You can definitely get around the currency issue by scaling yourself, but things like the timestamp issues (fractional seconds since the epoch with millisecond precision) are a little more problematic. You basically have to roll your own datetime format and lose any db support. Databases are about data after all. Why not have a rich way to describe it?
I think so too. But I don't think, say, not having a 32-bit integer type, and 16-bit and 8-bit integers, is a big problem, if you've got doubles. Maybe it's a nice-to-have. A 64 bit type or bigint would add real value.
- a 64-bit float
- a 64-bit int
everything else can be emulated in code from there and you can play all the encoding games you want to save space when you don't have to use it. This covers 99.999% of the use cases you reasonably see.
From there, I would argue, you should also have:
- a bit and byte
- 32-bit ints
- 32-bit float
- 128-bit int (once you add UUIDs you might as well make them full numerics citizens).
If I were doing a modern database, I'd have the kitchen sink as a type full numerics from 8 to 128 bit both signed and unsigned int and all supported hardware float sizes. I'd probably even have a 512-bit AVX type just to see what people would use it for.