4 ms·
FDB scales really well with reads, but it will bottleneck on writes a lot faster than you think. For write heavy workloads, Redis and Dragonfly would both leave
by richieartoul 4y ago
FDB scales really well with reads, but it will bottleneck on writes a lot faster than you think. For write heavy workloads, Redis and Dragonfly would both leave FDB in the dust (and I say this as a big FDB user/enthusiast).
- endisneigh 4y agoIsn’t this because FDB persists to disk? What’s the difference compared to Redis persisting to disk?
- richieartoul 4y agoNo there is much more to it than that. FoundationDB has a completely different architecture that is optimized for completely different things than Redis is. It’s not just about writing to disk vs. not. Redis is basically a very performant, single-threaded (mostly) single-node in-memory datastructures system with an efficient and readable server protocol strapped to it. FoundationDB is a completely different beast that has like 6+ distinct roles, and is optimized almost exclusively for interactive serializable transactions, range reads, and correctness. They’re just completely different things, I recommend reading the FoundationDB paper to get a sense for its architecture. The amount of “steps” involved in processing an FDB write is much higher than in Redis.