4 ms·
You're running a small social network, and you have ~200 containers running your Rails app, which gets scaled up and down by k8s all the time, not to mention tw
by fizx 8y ago
You're running a small social network, and you have ~200 containers running your Rails app, which gets scaled up and down by k8s all the time, not to mention twice-daily deploys.
Seems like you might want that 100GB of user relationship graph to live somewhere else, so you don't (1) massively inflate your RAM requirements on the app, (2) have to fan out updates to hundreds of boxes instead of a couple, (3) deal with cold start problems during the relatively frequent app restarts, (4) etc.
- easytiger 8y agoHow does the application described in the parent help with any of that? It doesn't allow other processes to access the data from what I can read, it doesn't allow distributed unified access to anything?
- ignoramous 8y ago> "If I wanted to do something in-memory, I'd just use data structures in my process" I think most of the repliers are posting response to the blanket statement you made on _all_ classes of in-memory databases (think memcached, redis, voltdb, HANA etc)
- easytiger 8y agoAh no, clearly there is a need for a process based service for such use cases. But this is a graph library, not a database