News for hackers. Stuff that matters.
Re:Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB by nameless912 on Wednesday October 11, 2023 @03:42PM (#37849317)
I said this in another comment, but I have seen _two_ applications in my career that actually had a request load that might warrant something like one of these databases. One was an application with double digit million MAU and thousands of RPS on a very shardable data set, which fit Spanner's ideal access pattern and performance profile pretty well, but we paid an absolute arm and a leg for the privilege and ended up implementing a distributed cache in front of Spanner to reduce costs. The other just kept the data set in memory and flushed to disk/S3 backup periodically because in that case liveness was more important than completeness.

In the first case, the database created as many problems as it solved (which is true of any large application running at scale; your data store will _always_ be suboptimal). A fancy, expensive NoSQL database won't save you from solving hard engineering problems. At smaller scales (on the order of tens-hundreds of RPS), it's hard to go wrong with any established SQL (or open source NoSQL if that floats your boat) database, and IMO Postgres is the most stable and best bang for your engineering buck feature wise.

Re:Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB by joshuamorton on Wednesday October 11, 2023 @03:53PM (#37849447)
Spanner isn't NoSQL. It's schema'd.
Re:Google Cloud Spanner is now half the cost of Amazon DynamoDB by ndriscoll on Wednesday October 11, 2023 @04:58PM (#37850166)
Postgres/mysql shouldn't have much trouble doing thousands of RPS on a laptop for basic CRUD queries (i.e. as long as you don't need to do table scans or large index range scans). It's possible to squeeze a lot more than that out of them.