News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:The database I wish I had by jrockway on Monday August 31, 2020 @10:29PM (#24337976)
I just want a database that takes no configuration options except for a list of peers and a disk partition to write to and provides strictly serializable transactions 100% of the time (modulo partitions).

I'd rather start with slow and correct, and implement hacks to improve performance once slow becomes "too slow". But instead, database engines are sold on benchmark performance, so out of the box they lose transactions they told you they committed, or read uncommitted writes, or all sorts of other crazy things. I don't want this unless I write code myself to do those things. (If I go through the API, it must be completely consistent. If I clone the drive of the database server and pick around at random disk blocks, sure, maybe I'll see some uncommitted writes.)

Re:The database I wish I had by implfuture on Monday August 31, 2020 @10:36PM (#24338015)
Check out FoundationDB! It’s a distributed key value store with strictly serializable txns by default.
Re:The database I wish I had by jrockway on Tuesday September 01, 2020 @03:50PM (#24346212)
I really like FoundationDB. It still feels like that system where if it breaks you will be blamed aggressively for picking a weird thing, so I'd like to see some more success stories, I guess. But if I really care, maybe I should be the success story.

The Go API is also kind of weird, and conflicts with my general thought on Go code that every I/O operation should be cancelable with a context -- they really don't subscribe to that point of view.

Those are the main reasons why I don't use it... but I guess they have the fundamentals down (the "foundation" if you will), so it's probably worth powering through those nits and start using it.