11 ms·

For background, I haven't used TimescaleDB before, but I've done some pretty advanced ORM work to vertically shard PG tables in Rails and I know PG pretty well,

For background, I haven't used TimescaleDB before, but I've done some pretty advanced ORM work to vertically shard PG tables in Rails and I know PG pretty well, so I'm quite curious about TimescaleDB. > * Even though most of their code licensed under Apache license, some code is under their proprietary license. I don't really think this is a perfectly fair characterization. Their proprietary license is essentially "don't host a cloud database and charge for it" to stop Amazon from building TimescaleDB right into RDS, or similar. I think it's a totally fair license without too much to worry about if they go out of business. > * Even though the product itself is technically very stable, the version compatibility leaves a lot to be desired. There are removed features and broken APIs from version to version. This would be my biggest worry. Upgrading Postgres is already stressful enough, having to deal with broken APIs from version to version would leave me pretty upset, though I've not heard of anyone complain about this before, so I'm not sure how much of a problem this is in practice.

lurkerasdfh8 5y ago
> > * Even though most of their code licensed under Apache license, some code is under their proprietary license. > I don't really think this is a perfectly fair characterization. Their proprietary license is essentially "don't host a cloud database and charge for it" to stop Amazon from building TimescaleDB right into RDS, or similar. "yeah, go ahead, infringe that copyright and host a internal/for-direct-clients only database, because i guess that would be OK from their license, even though it is not explicitly allowed" pardon the sarcasm, but i literally heard that from our lawyers today regarding another project's license, as something (quoting again) "no lawyer would ever say to their clients".
- mfreed 5y ago
  We did work carefully with IP counsel to make sure this type of thing is pretty buttoned-up and expressly permitted: https://www.timescale.com/legal/licenses#section-2-1-grant https://www.timescale.com/legal/licenses#section-2-1-grant
  - 3pt14159 5y ago
    As a bit of an aside Michael, I've been pretty impressed with the quality of your team's response on HackerNews. If my skillset was a better fit for your company I'd consider applying. I hope you all get some great talent with this latest raise and I hope I get a chance to try out the product soon.

lurkerasdfh8 5y ago

> > * Even though most of their code licensed under Apache license, some code is under their proprietary license. > I don't really think this is a perfectly fair characterization. Their proprietary license is essentially "don't host a cloud database and charge for it" to stop Amazon from building TimescaleDB right into RDS, or similar. "yeah, go ahead, infringe that copyright and host a internal/for-direct-clients only database, because i guess that would be OK from their license, even though it is not explicitly allowed" pardon the sarcasm, but i literally heard that from our lawyers today regarding another project's license, as something (quoting again) "no lawyer would ever say to their clients".

mfreed 5y ago
We did work carefully with IP counsel to make sure this type of thing is pretty buttoned-up and expressly permitted: https://www.timescale.com/legal/licenses#section-2-1-grant https://www.timescale.com/legal/licenses#section-2-1-grant
- 3pt14159 5y ago
  As a bit of an aside Michael, I've been pretty impressed with the quality of your team's response on HackerNews. If my skillset was a better fit for your company I'd consider applying. I hope you all get some great talent with this latest raise and I hope I get a chance to try out the product soon.