3 ms·

@isoos, I'd be curious to understand more about why you thought YugaByte would be more operationally complex to deploy, as we strive to make things as easy to g

@isoos, I'd be curious to understand more about why you thought YugaByte would be more operationally complex to deploy, as we strive to make things as easy to get started with as possible... For example, for local testing, in our Quick Start docs section, we have info for: mac/linux, involving just downloading and unpacking the release and you should be good to go; for local docker, you can download our control script; for k8s download our sample yml. Finally, for non-local testing, we have a Deploy > Manual Deployment section, highlighting the 3 steps for downloading YugaByte, bringing up Masters (metadata nodes) and then Tservers (data nodes). Note: I work at YugaByte.

isoos 8y ago
With CockroachDB, I was able to create a cluster with three commands, one command on each node (docker run ....), one port on each node. It can't really get more simple than that. With YugaByteDB: I needed to think about master and tserver nodes, to run them and connect them separately. There was no clear guide that had "run these three docker command on the three different nodes" and be done with it. Note: I run everything is in simple docker images (and not compose, not swarm, not kubernates, just plain docker images).
manigandham 8y ago
CRDB is only has one node type which are all symmetrical, deployed as a single binary. It doesn't get simpler than that. Most other databases insist on multiple layers and dependencies which only shifts more work onto developers who have to install and maintain it.