2 ms·
I mean if you spun up Postgres on EC2 you would be directly writing to EBS so that's not really the part I'm worried about. I'm more worried about the lack of r
by Spivak 3y ago
I mean if you spun up Postgres on EC2 you would be directly writing to EBS so that's not really the part I'm worried about. I'm more worried about the lack of replication, seemingly no way to scale reads or writes, beyond a single server, and no way to failover uninterrupted.
I'm guessing it doesn't matter for their use-case which is a good thing. When you realize you only need like this teeny subset of db features and none of the hard parts writing you own starts to get feasible.
- VirusNewbie 3y agoRight, cassandra/scylla model is really good for time series use cases, i’ve yet to see good arguments against them.
- jpgvm 3y agoIt's generally good for append-only workloads. Where C* databases seems to fall down are point updates and in this case, requirement to implement your own aggregations. For these workloads you are much better off (unless you are already running C* somewhere and are super familiar with it) with something like Clickhouse or if you need good slice and dice then Druid or Pinot.
- VirusNewbie 3y agoYeah, point updates are less than stellar, but for aggregation, it's fine unless you're really want adhoc low latency queries. For anything substantial you'd want Spark/Beam for aggregation otherwise, and the Cassandra model is really fast at loading up time series type data in parallel, and Spark etc. make it really easy to do. The tradeoff is just the high startup cost of those kinds of jobs.
- drdaeman 3y agoReplication and reads can be scaled with something like Patroni or even a DIY replication setup (if one knows what they’re doing, of course), but writes are difficult.