6 ms·
As the Sidekiq maintainer, I’ve seen many customers need to shard Redis around 5000-10000 jobs/sec. Sharding is a major operational headache so this could be ve
by mperham 7y ago
As the Sidekiq maintainer, I’ve seen many customers need to shard Redis around 5000-10000 jobs/sec. Sharding is a major operational headache so this could be very useful to heavy job processors if it does prove to scale better.
I also find it interesting that the BSD license enables this 3rd party company to fork Redis and build closed source commercial software on top of it. One of the trade offs to consider when licensing a project.
- foota 7y agoOk, what is a job/second?
- ekianjo 7y agoMay have been better to use GPL2?
- lilyball 7y agoBetter how? If using GPLv2 means companies stay away from the project instead of building on top of it, that's not a win for anyone.
- pjmlp 7y agoThis way is a win for a company selling closed source software, that save R&D money and contributed nothing back. As user of commercial software I am fine with it, not so sure if FOSS advocates at large will be so happy when only non-copyleft licenses survive and we are back in the shareware/pd libraries days.
- lilyball 7y ago> and contributed nothing back Why do we assume closed-source software vendors contribute nothing back? Speaking as an employee at a company that produces a closed-source software product that uses open-source libraries, I've contributed plenty back to various libraries, including publishing some of my own. Libraries with permissive licenses get more users, and more users mean more opportunities for receiving contributions. Something like GPLv2 is really only truly effective at soliciting contributions that it wouldn't have received otherwise if there's no viable alternative. Or to give another example, Rust is dual-licensed under the Apache License, Version 2.0 and MIT. This permissive license made it really easy for lots of people (including myself) to contribute to it. If it were released instead using the GPL, it would likely be a shadow of the language it is today, if even still alive at all.
- pjmlp 7y agoBecause that has been my experience in like, almost every employer and customer I have work for since the mid-90's.
- rvp-x 7y agoWorking in places that were based off permissively licensed software, the default position we had was "no upstreaming" and if I wanted to upstream something I need to ask for permission. when you're contributing to GPL software, you don't need your employer's permission for it to be upstreamed. If they release the code, and don't violate the GPL, then there's nothing the employer can do to stop it from going upstream.
- 7y ago
- markonen 7y agoI'm not sure if you're referring to KeyDB or something else as "closed source commercial software", but KeyDB is BSD licensed like Redis: https://github.com/JohnSully/KeyDB/blob/unstable/COPYING https://github.com/JohnSully/KeyDB/blob/unstable/COPYING
- mperham 7y agoThey sell closed source extensions to Redis AFAICT. https://keydb.dev/modules-redis.html https://keydb.dev/modules-redis.html