News for hackers. Stuff that matters.

A comment on Transactional Object Storage?. Parent comment

Re:Transactional Object Storage? by choppaface on Monday November 25, 2024 @02:41PM (#42239456)
Not a full solution, but seeing the OP seeks to be a key-value store (versus full RDBMS? despite the comparisons with Spanner and Postgres?), important to weigh how Rockset (also mainly KV store) dealt with S3-backed caching at scale:

  * https://rockset.com/blog/separate-compute-storage-rocksdb/

  * https://github.com/rockset/rocksdb-cloud
Keep in mind Rockset is definitely a bit biased towards vector search use cases.
[ Parent | on HN ]
Re:Transactional Object Storage? by mbrt on Monday November 25, 2024 @03:15PM (#42239743)
Nice, thanks for the reference!

BTW, the comparison was only to give an idea about isolation levels, it wasn't meant to be a feature-to-feature comparison.

Perhaps I didn't make it prominent enough, but at some point I say that many SQL databases have key-value stores at their core, and implement a SQL layer on top (e.g. https://www.cockroachlabs.com/docs/v22.1/architecture/overvi...).

Basically SQL can be a feature added later to a solid KV store as a base.

[ Parent | on HN ]