3 ms·
so FoundationDB is user as a file system for storing SQlite files? In this case, the write contention performance would not be much better than using SQLite ov
by skyde 4y ago
so FoundationDB is user as a file system for storing SQlite files?
In this case, the write contention performance would not be much better than using SQLite over SMB.
- ok_dad 4y agoYou should read up on FDB, I doubt you’ll have issues like that until extreme scale. I guarantee it isn’t just like sharing a file over SMB, lol.
- skyde 4y agoI have zero issue with FDB but some worry about mvSQLite. After reading more about the design it seem to use FDB to store Pages and using FDB transaction to make those update have have Strict serializable isolation. This would work correctly but it seem that mvSQLite also try to do its own MVCC logic instead of simply using FDB transactions. It is well known that implementing Serializable transaction on top of MVCC is not trivial. There was a bug in Postgresql from version 9.1 to version 12.3 making it not truly Serializable. See: https://jepsen.io/analyses/postgresql-12.3 https://jepsen.io/analyses/postgresql-12.3
- losfair 4y agoUnlike a regular filesystem, mvsqlite offloads both storage and transaction processing to FoundationDB. Fine-grained optimistic locking is implemented, and massive write concurrency across a cluster is possible.