4 ms·
An 'explicitly sharded' SQL database - effectively as many databases as you need with some special sauce to let you run transactions across multiple shards. Nea
by thomasfedb 8y ago
An 'explicitly sharded' SQL database - effectively as many databases as you need with some special sauce to let you run transactions across multiple shards. Neat.
- hestefisk 8y agoIt’s like having your cake and eating it too.
- davewritescode 8y agoI suspect that running transactions over multiple partitions would incur more coordination overhead and probably won’t perform well.
- StavrosK 8y agoProbably, but what's the alternative?
- verelo 8y agoI don't get the feeling they had an alternative (I don't either!), i suspect it was just commentary.
- StavrosK 8y agoYeah, it must be. I don't think there's a way to generically perform well on distributed queries, so this is probably as good as it gets.
- davewritescode 8y agoDepends on the use case. There’s lots of ways that databases can can make trade offs on CAP. Unfortunately there’s not a single silver bullet. You’ll make different choices for an application that’s processing clickstream data than one that’s managing highly relational data.
- imtringued 8y ago1. Run two beefy nodes and accept dataloss of unreplicated changes during failover. 2. Use eventual consistency (not suitable for every workload)
- makmanalp 8y agoSpanner is a bit like this too if I recall correctly.