FoundationDB high contention allocator

Re:FoundationDB high contention allocator by wimbledon on Thursday August 23, 2018 @10:42AM (#17827649)

FoundationDB could really have been a big big thing had they not burnt bridges with their initial user set (i was one of them). It was a really cool database.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FoundationDB high contention allocator by bsaul on Thursday August 23, 2018 @10:55AM (#17827747)

Care to provide more details ? (i don't understand why you got downvoted btw)

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FoundationDB high contention allocator by wimbledon on Friday August 24, 2018 @06:34AM (#17834045)

FoundationDB had everything (launched or work in progress). SQL that was fast like NoSQL, No single point of failure, Scaling, Search, etc, etc... all built into one database. It was designed to remove the pain of managing many different components. For example, handling 'search' separately (via solr/lucene/cloudsearch) is a pain.

I'm not sure about the downvotes. I guess HN has lots of karma-police.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FoundationDB high contention allocator by bsaul on Tuesday August 28, 2018 @06:14AM (#17857687)

I was thinking about the « burning the bridge on initial users » part. But maybe you meant selling to Apple.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FoundationDB high contention allocator by setheron on Thursday August 23, 2018 @11:02AM (#17827809)

I think because when they sold to Apple they pulled their support and binaries.

[ Parent | on HN ]

Re:FoundationDB high contention allocator by pmart123 on Thursday August 23, 2018 @11:20AM (#17827979)

Didn't Apple basically buy it as an acquihire and shut it down the next day?

[ Parent | on HN ]