51–60 of 74 posts
Is there any change to the data model? Guessing still no secondary indexes for example.
They're working on getting to feature parity with cassandra by version 2.0 http://www.scylladb.com/technology/status/
If I was Datastax I would be scared of Scylla. They have momentum and they are one of the best engineering teams around outside of top teams at Google/FB etc.
I wouldn't. Enterprise companies care about performance, sure. But far, far less than they care about being on a supported platform. DataStax has done the hard yards over the years to prove themselves capable of supporting Cassandra. SycllaDB has no street cred at all. So SycllaDB might make some inroads in performance critical startups and web companies. But that is likely to be about it.
But showed Scylla to my co worker. And he was like: holly cow! We need to install that!
And I was like: bag, we are at a bank. Forget it :)
I don't get it. Is this just a faster Cassandra? What's their competitive niche?
Their marketing points are really understood and relatable to people who know what a pain operating Cassandra can be. The two biggest pain points IMO are read-repair and compaction - both of which must be run periodically and consume a huge amount of resources. Read Repair is especially a pain because (1) it must be run periodically or you risk losing data (2) it takes forever to complete in some deploys (ex - you mu…
Congratulations to the team. Any word on native JSON types ? Scylla will have another reason to drop Cassandra.
There's an open issue about it on Github:
https://github.com/scylladb/scylla/issues/2058
Please feel free to upvote and comment on the issue to voice your interest in the feature.
I like ScyllaDb. But I am not sure, why does it need to run on XFS only ?
The entire database is designed for performance with message-passing thread-per-core async architecture. XFS is the only filesystem that has good async support. http://www.scylladb.com/2016/02/09/qualifying-filesystems/ http://www.scylladb.com/technology/architecture/
Earlier quoted context omitted.
They're working on getting to feature parity with cassandra by version 2.0 http://www.scylladb.com/technology/status/
Unfortunately that doesn't seem to give any indication of how long that might be. I just saw a post from one of their engineers about a year ago that said secondary indices would only take about 2 weeks to implement.
We are currently working on first finishing materialized view support, which will hopefully be completed in the upcoming months. Secondary indices will be implemented after that and we're hoping to reuse MV infrastructure for that. So I personally expect both features to land into a release later this year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
A faster, well engineered, drop in replacement for Cassandra is a pretty competitive niche in of itself, don't you think?
I guess but I don't really know. Lots of people have Cassandra in production. I suppose there is a certain segment of that market that needs a super high performance version, but is it really that big?
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Unfortunately that doesn't seem to give any indication of how long that might be. I just saw a post from one of their engineers about a year ago that said secondary indices would only take about 2 weeks to implement.
Where did you see that kind of estimate? We are currently working on first finishing materialized view support, which will hopefully be completed in the upcoming months. Secondary indices will be implemented after that and we're hoping to reuse MV infrastructure for that. So I personally expect both features to land into a release later this year.
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where did you see that kind of estimate? We are currently working on first finishing materialized view support, which will hopefully be completed in the upcoming months. Secondary indices will be implemented after that and we're hoping to reuse MV infrastructure for that. So I personally expect both features to land into a release later this year.
Here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11523531
Please note that @glommer is talking about the classic secondary index implementation in Cassandra, which is very simple but also broken. I don't know the details but we probably did have "half-ready" code for that. We decided against going forward with it because Cassandra had already moved to SASI (which is also much more complex). As I said, we're currently focusing on materialized views, and tacking secondary indices after that.
Btw, I highly recommend subscribing to our user mailing list or engaging on Github for questions and comments about features. You'll get better and up-to-date answers there.
Update: reading @glommer's reply carefully, he explicitly says that he's unsure if we'll move forward with that specific implementation: "_if_ we do implement it, it should land in our main version in a couple of weeks" (emphasis mine).
Earlier quoted context omitted.
Where did you see that kind of estimate? We are currently working on first finishing materialized view support, which will hopefully be completed in the upcoming months. Secondary indices will be implemented after that and we're hoping to reuse MV infrastructure for that. So I personally expect both features to land into a release later this year.
Here: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=11523531