3 ms·
this is a comparison between two things you'd use if you want to eliminate single points of failure. "you can do better if you're willing to tolerate a single p
by sigstoat 9y ago
this is a comparison between two things you'd use if you want to eliminate single points of failure. "you can do better if you're willing to tolerate a single point of failure!" is, uh, apples to oranges, at best? note the section comparing availability.
(i feel there is also something to be said for being able to get lots of transactions out of more, but less expensive machines. the world is full of people working under a variety of constraints.)
- qaq 9y agoYou do realize the number of critical workloads running on HA RDBMs clusters is N orders of magnitude higher than number of critical workloads running on CockroachDB?
- sigstoat 9y agooh, you meant to say that a cluster of high end commodity x86 boxes with postgresql and a bunch of HA stuff you've got to set up yourself could beat it. spectacular, that sounds great, i'm convinced.
- qaq 9y agoI meant to say that it would be interesting to see benchmarks for dataset sizes meaningful for running distributed systems.