5 ms·
That DynamoDB VFS looks cool! I agree that the VFS api makes one think about plenty of crazy ideas. Someone is working on a VFS based on Foundation DB[0] that l
by polyrand 4y ago
That DynamoDB VFS looks cool! I agree that the VFS api makes one think about plenty of crazy ideas. Someone is working on a VFS based on Foundation DB[0] that looks very promising. It was recently discussed here[1]
[0]: https://github.com/losfair/mvsqlite https://github.com/losfair/mvsqlite
[1]: https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32269287 https://news.ycombinator.com/item?id=32269287
- endisneigh 4y agoI wish I knew rust so I could contribute, as I think that's the best one. FDB has the best durability/transactional guarantees of any key/value store that's distributed as far as I've seen. Syclla for example is also pretty great but doesn't have the same guarantees for transactions.
- victor106 4y ago> FDB has the best durability/transactional guarantees of any key/value store that's distributed as far as I've seen. Can you expand more on this? I keep hearing that on HN but what guarantees does FDB provide over other key/value DB’s?
- endisneigh 4y agoI’d read this: https://apple.github.io/foundationdb/cap-theorem.html https://apple.github.io/foundationdb/cap-theorem.html And https://apple.github.io/foundationdb/consistency.html https://apple.github.io/foundationdb/consistency.html For a summary. Tldr is that FDB provides transactional guarantees similar to an rdbms but can be distributed and has optimistic concurrency, meaning locks are not necessary. In the context of SQLite that’s the main issue it has and FDB is positioned to solve it.
- victor106 4y agoVery useful. Thank you so much