3 ms·

Sooo they're finally launching a Spanner contender? I'm itching to read more details into what this actually is under the marketing blab.

• steepben 2y ago
  There's a blog on the technical details here: https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/database/introducing-amazon-aurora-dsql/ https://aws.amazon.com/blogs/database/introducing-amazon-aur...
  • hobs 2y ago
    The most interesting page is always quotas and limits: https://docs.aws.amazon.com/aurora-dsql/latest/userguide/CHAP_quotas.html https://docs.aws.amazon.com/aurora-dsql/latest/userguide/CHA... Seeing the No to configurable for some of the settings is the most telling hard limits that we can see up front. Some Very Noteable ones are: Maximum size of all data modified within a write transaction: 10 MiB Maximum transaction time: 5 minutes
    • bobnamob 2y ago
      The 10MiB transaction size limit smells a lot like FoundationDBs transaction size limit
      • bcap 2y ago
        10MiB is an appealing number for humans. Can easily appear across different designs.
• MapleWalnut 2y ago
  Spanner provides serializability. It seems like DSQL only guarantees "repeatable read". https://docs.aws.amazon.com/aurora-dsql/latest/userguide/working-with-postgresql-compatibility-unsupported-features.html#working-with-postgresql-compatibility-unsupported-limitations https://docs.aws.amazon.com/aurora-dsql/latest/userguide/wor...
• timmg 2y ago
  > Sooo they're finally launching a Spanner contender? It may be even better in one important way: (if I understand correctly) for Spanner, you have to provision servers -- and keep them running. So GCP version of Spanner really makes no sense for anything that isn't huge. This sounds more like "Spanner as a Service" -- which is something I've always wanted (for my hobby projects, no less :) Unless I misundertood, anyway.