Re:FoundationDB: A distributed, unbundled, transactional key...
by sigstoat on Monday June 07, 2021 @01:42PM
(#27425548)
> There weren't any, which is why that particular shop elected to roll their own distributed system on top of rocks.
that's nuts. rocks could've been added as a storage engine to fdb far more easily.
Re:FoundationDB: A distributed, unbundled, transactional key...
by jeffbee on Monday June 07, 2021 @01:55PM
(#27425754)
For the record, I said the same thing. But it's a management problem because on the one hand you have a known open project with demonstrable flaws, and on the other you have your own in-house developers and you will tend to discount the bugs they haven't written yet.
But, also for the same record, thinking you can implement a reliable, globally-replicated key-value store on top of FoundationDB that is cheaper and better than Cloud Spanner may be evidence of the same cognitive bias.
Re:FoundationDB: A distributed, unbundled, transactional key...
by sigstoat on Monday June 07, 2021 @02:19PM
(#27426084)
> But, also for the same record, thinking you can implement a reliable, globally-replicated key-value store on top of FoundationDB that is cheaper and better than Cloud Spanner may be evidence of the same cognitive bias.
man, good thing nobody made any claim like that.
Re:FoundationDB: A distributed, unbundled, transactional key...
by ryanworl on Monday June 07, 2021 @01:46PM
(#27425614)
This is currently in progress right now.
https://github.com/apple/foundationdb/blob/e7d7b39f12afa8ea2...
In general I think people who think they want to do FoundationDB owe themselves a serious contemplation of the cost/benefit of using Cloud Spanner instead. Obviously you cannot do your own fault injection testing of Spanner, but it does have end-to-end checksums.