I dont like when companies are not transparent about the pricing of their product. If you have a price page, show the price, so that Í can decide if this is relevant for me or not ...
CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
61–70 of 187 posts
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#62And their fucking stupid name..... if they fail, they surely will be remembered as the company with the idiotic name. I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".
Cockroaches are considered pretty durable right? In the 80s I remember the line was always that after the nukes landed there would only be cockroaches and twinkies left.
That's not a bad thing to say about a database.
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#63How much and what kind of memory and storage (SATA SSD, NVMe SSD, HDD?) is included in the 3 nodes used for testing? This benchmarking is really interesting but the next level is to understand the cost per tmpC measured. Memory especially and storage is a big component of cost these days.
Short answer: 3 n1-highcpu-16 GCE VMs with Local SSDs attached. We're working on a complete disclosure document, with comprehensive reproduction steps to replicate all our numbers. This document should be out in a couple of weeks. We want to walk you through, command by command, on how to reproduce these numbers, and verify the results for yourself.
Thanks for the short answer. Would be good to know how many local SSDs are attached though for the 850 warehouse scenario. The TPC-C documentation says each warehouse maintains 100,000 items in their stock, but I can't surmise from that how much storage is required to hold 850 warehouses' worth of data. I'm impatient though so let me try to work through the #s myself. I'm using GCP's monthly reserved pricing in the US-Iowa region as a reference as of today's pricing.
A n1-highcpu-16 GCE VM costs $289.84/month. Local SSDs are added at 375GB per drive, and they cost $30/month at $0.08 per GB. I highly doubt you could fit the ~1250 warehouses (what got you the peak TPM-C) on 375GB local SSD, but I have to make assumptions here! So, now you're paying $319.84 per instance per month, or $949.52 for 3 of these instances.
At 16,150 TPC-C, you're paying roughly $0.06 per TPC-C, or, looking at it the other way, you're getting 16.83 TPC-C per dollar spent each month. Is that good? I don't know!
Now, the really interesting question is, is that TPC-C/$ on CRDB 2.0 actually better than TPC-C/$ on CRDB 1.1? The answer lies in how many local SSDs you have to provision to reach that peak throughput. Peak is at ~1300 warehouses on CRDB 2.0, and ~800 warehouses on CRDB 1.1.
Does anyone with more knowledge here know how much storage you need per warehouse in the TPC-C test?
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#64And their fucking stupid name..... if they fail, they surely will be remembered as the company with the idiotic name. I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".
>I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".
You used to work at a company called Yammer . God forbid they're not called tech.ai.io-ify.
I think it's really funny that this comes up almost every time there's a post about CockroachDB. There were also a lot of people commenting on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16693253 about foul language and such. I also remember being at a big conference and one of the speakers being a little cavalier and dropping an obscenity for emphasis - in the meetup comments people were so deeply offended. And let's not forget people's constant flagellation around brainfuck.
Make no mistake: this is the flavor of conservatism and hypocrisy that tech is home to: pretend to be liberally minded but lash out whenever something is just slightly divergent.
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#65And their fucking stupid name..... if they fail, they surely will be remembered as the company with the idiotic name. I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".
Cockroaches are considered pretty durable right? In the 80s I remember the line was always that after the nukes landed there would only be cockroaches and twinkies left. That's not a bad thing to say about a database.
And TwinkieDB would be a copyright violation! ;)
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#66And their fucking stupid name..... if they fail, they surely will be remembered as the company with the idiotic name. I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".
But cockroaches are known for being extremely hardy! That seems like a good quality for a database..
Perhaps you should replace serious with pretentious or shallow?
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#67And their fucking stupid name..... if they fail, they surely will be remembered as the company with the idiotic name. I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".
>I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach". You used to work at a company called Yammer . God forbid they're not called tech.ai.io-ify. I think it's really funny that this comes up almost every time there's a post about CockroachDB. There were also a lot of people commenting on https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=16693253 about foul language and such. I also remember being at a big confere…
>I also remember being at a big conference and one of the speakers being a little cavalier and dropping an obscenity for emphasis - in the meetup comments people were so deeply offended
Fuck those guys lol
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#68I like what Cockroach is doing, I'm rooting for them to grow and survive. Unfortunately the only time I hear about it is when they post blogs. I never hear about it from other people.
raises hand we're using them extensively. They're our database of choice that we've paired with Nakama[1] which is an open-source, distributed server. Have nothing but great things to say about the database itself in terms of growing performance and the team behind it :). They've been great to us since day-1.
[1] github.com/heroiclabs/nakama
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#69And their fucking stupid name..... if they fail, they surely will be remembered as the company with the idiotic name. I can't see serious engineers working on a company named "Cockroach".
There's nothing wrong with the name. It's quite good, in fact.
Re: CockroachDB 2.0 Performance Makes Significant Strides
#70I will not use this product based on it's name alone, it give me jeepers. Petty? Damn straight it's petty. Doesn't make it less real though.
Came here to say the same! I am sorry but this name alone prevents me from exploring this product. Whoever chose that has probably never encountered a cockroach....flying.
It's just a pun about it being nearly indestructible. Pretty good name imo