3 ms·

I am failing to understand your question insert into user_rating will work. This is what it's doing now?

halfmatthalfcat 3y ago
I think they mean, why introduce this new piece of infrastructure when you can create this internally with a singular table and probably a queue somewhere if we're being really fancy.
- nevodavid10 3y ago
  I think you can def do it on a low scale. You would not need this tech. At least not the Kafka / Timescale feature. It would place nice if you were a bit bigger - a news website, a social media and so on.
  - bastawhiz 3y ago
    > It would place nice if you were a bit bigger - a news website, a social media and so on. How big do you think is "big"? I run a system that handles about 3k requests per second (~1:100 writes to reads). No caching, no Redis, just Postgres. One master and a hot standby for failover. It sits around 25% CPU, and most of that is from opening and closing connections rather than queries. There's an important lesson in avoiding complexity for speculative reasons. Unless you have data that suggests more components materially improve the system, save yourself the heartache and build for the simplest system that meets your needs. You've built a dump truck when you probably only need a pickup truck, and while you might need more than a pickup truck someday, you're paying dump truck maintenance costs in the meantime (and your future needs probably look more like a King Ranch than a dump truck anyway).
    - nevodavid10 3y ago
      It's not a big problem to create another version without Kafka, and use Postgres :) What do you think about the idea?
      - bastawhiz 3y ago
        I don't want to tell you what the right answer is for your project. But my dad always said "Use the right tool for the job." And if you don't know what tool is right, test some tools and see which one works best.
  - jitl 3y ago
    How many clicks per second on an item would justify this architecture? Ballpark numbers and napkin math estimates is fine - again it would seem reasonable if justified. If I’m gonna get that many clicks per second, it’s likely I’ll already have my own analytics system, queue system, cache architecture, application database. Why adopt this external code when I’ll spend more work integrating it into my application compared to building it myself? If I’m small, why spend all the work or subscribe to your managed product when a very simple CRUD approach using only my app database and polling will suffice? Anyways that’s my perspective. There’s probably some market out there but I’m not part of it, that’s all I’m saying.
    - nevodavid10 3y ago
      My main question was, how many will I have + what the architecture should be for other developers to trust me to handle their load? In a few years from now. (I am talking about the managed version)

I think they mean, why introduce this new piece of infrastructure when you can create this internally with a singular table and probably a queue somewhere if we're being really fancy.

nevodavid10 3y ago
I think you can def do it on a low scale. You would not need this tech. At least not the Kafka / Timescale feature. It would place nice if you were a bit bigger - a news website, a social media and so on.
- bastawhiz 3y ago
  > It would place nice if you were a bit bigger - a news website, a social media and so on. How big do you think is "big"? I run a system that handles about 3k requests per second (~1:100 writes to reads). No caching, no Redis, just Postgres. One master and a hot standby for failover. It sits around 25% CPU, and most of that is from opening and closing connections rather than queries. There's an important lesson in avoiding complexity for speculative reasons. Unless you have data that suggests more components materially improve the system, save yourself the heartache and build for the simplest system that meets your needs. You've built a dump truck when you probably only need a pickup truck, and while you might need more than a pickup truck someday, you're paying dump truck maintenance costs in the meantime (and your future needs probably look more like a King Ranch than a dump truck anyway).
  - nevodavid10 3y ago
    It's not a big problem to create another version without Kafka, and use Postgres :) What do you think about the idea?
    - bastawhiz 3y ago
      I don't want to tell you what the right answer is for your project. But my dad always said "Use the right tool for the job." And if you don't know what tool is right, test some tools and see which one works best.
- jitl 3y ago
  How many clicks per second on an item would justify this architecture? Ballpark numbers and napkin math estimates is fine - again it would seem reasonable if justified. If I’m gonna get that many clicks per second, it’s likely I’ll already have my own analytics system, queue system, cache architecture, application database. Why adopt this external code when I’ll spend more work integrating it into my application compared to building it myself? If I’m small, why spend all the work or subscribe to your managed product when a very simple CRUD approach using only my app database and polling will suffice? Anyways that’s my perspective. There’s probably some market out there but I’m not part of it, that’s all I’m saying.
  - nevodavid10 3y ago
    My main question was, how many will I have + what the architecture should be for other developers to trust me to handle their load? In a few years from now. (I am talking about the managed version)