4 ms·

Excellent post! I wonder why, given the performance, KeyDB is not more popular? Is there lack of hosted services?

• diroussel 7y ago
  Redis has been around a long time. ElastiCache has been around a while and is deployable in AWS very easily. KeyDB is new.
  • nijave 7y ago
    And that comes with lots of libraries, tools, and documentation to make using them easy
    • jdsully 7y ago
      KeyDB is compatible with existing Redis libraries and tools. If you use some of the newer features your library may lack direct support but most have extensiblity features built in.
• sidlls 7y ago
  Redis (single-threaded) is just fine for all but the biggest scale, is well-tested, and because it's a simpler model less likely to have all the terribly complicated edge-case bugs the introduction of concurrency implies. Also there's a matter of need. It does one no good if a KV store can churn through 200 kops/s if you can only deliver 100kops/s. If one or two redis instances (plus replicas, etc., or maybe a minimal three-master cluster) can serve the entire workload, saving two or three nodes by "upgrading" to the likes of KeyDB doesn't seem worth it. I mean, unless you're aiming to get to the melt-the-metal it's so "hot" all the time performance.
  • aledalgrande 7y ago
    Interesting, yeah more bugs due to the complexity of multi threaded programming is the first thing that came to mind.