4 ms·

> We trust Aerospike because it's been hardened by lots of much much larger companies with very high production usage Why would you trust something after its u

> We trust Aerospike because it's been hardened by lots of much much larger companies with very high production usage Why would you trust something after its untrustworthiness is demonstrated before your eyes? Just because some other companies use it and haven't yet publicized dissatisfaction? That is not how you make sound engineering decisions.

manigandham 11y ago
Demonstrated? It's just a single post, we would have to replicate these results ourselves and our specific environment. We use this 24/7 in a production system and have not encountered any issues and it matches actual data and experience from real conversations and meetings with other companies. We don't make decisions from blog posts.
- vruiz 11y ago
  aphyr is a well respected expert in the matter. You can reproduce the test yourself https://github.com/aphyr/jepsen https://github.com/aphyr/jepsen Consider that if you have not experienced any issues yet it might say more about your network stability than aerospike. Of course you can chose to ignore it, but network partitions eventually do happen, and when it does I hope your data is not mission critical.
  - manigandham 11y ago
    Are all the other companies and engineers using it useless then? One guy is not enough to make any opinion either way. And yes, we put a lot of effort into making sure the hardware and network are good, because when that works right everything else works well too. Trying to solve hardware issues with software is bound to lead to misery. We have network partitions all the time, that's how we upgrade. On average each node is replaced every 2 weeks and we just terminate it through the API (both softlayer and aws). No big deal and we haven't lost any data yet, confirmed by other records in other datastores that have to match up. If aphyr's post is the ultimate rating, why would anyone use anything thing else he's written about?
    - vruiz 11y ago
      > Are all the other companies and engineers using it useless then? Of course not, software is about trade-offs, and every company has different use cases. Is it their primary datastore? if they lose data do they lose some data samples for a recommendation engine? or someone's money? I wouldn't assume "if it works for them it works for me". > Trying to solve hardware issues with software is bound to lead to misery. I strongly disagree with that, I believe exactly the oposite. > If aphyr's post is the ultimate rating, why would anyone use anything thing else he's written about? He does not judge the system's usefulness, throughput, etc. But he's a good benchmark for distributed system's reliability. While he might not test every possible scenario, if he says software X loses data on conditions Y, I do believe him. It's still up to me to decide if that matters for my use case or not.
- themartorana 11y ago
  Sad that this was downvoted. I'll add an upvote because I think it's relevant.

manigandham 11y ago

Demonstrated? It's just a single post, we would have to replicate these results ourselves and our specific environment. We use this 24/7 in a production system and have not encountered any issues and it matches actual data and experience from real conversations and meetings with other companies. We don't make decisions from blog posts.

vruiz 11y ago
aphyr is a well respected expert in the matter. You can reproduce the test yourself https://github.com/aphyr/jepsen https://github.com/aphyr/jepsen Consider that if you have not experienced any issues yet it might say more about your network stability than aerospike. Of course you can chose to ignore it, but network partitions eventually do happen, and when it does I hope your data is not mission critical.
- manigandham 11y ago
  Are all the other companies and engineers using it useless then? One guy is not enough to make any opinion either way. And yes, we put a lot of effort into making sure the hardware and network are good, because when that works right everything else works well too. Trying to solve hardware issues with software is bound to lead to misery. We have network partitions all the time, that's how we upgrade. On average each node is replaced every 2 weeks and we just terminate it through the API (both softlayer and aws). No big deal and we haven't lost any data yet, confirmed by other records in other datastores that have to match up. If aphyr's post is the ultimate rating, why would anyone use anything thing else he's written about?
  - vruiz 11y ago
    > Are all the other companies and engineers using it useless then? Of course not, software is about trade-offs, and every company has different use cases. Is it their primary datastore? if they lose data do they lose some data samples for a recommendation engine? or someone's money? I wouldn't assume "if it works for them it works for me". > Trying to solve hardware issues with software is bound to lead to misery. I strongly disagree with that, I believe exactly the oposite. > If aphyr's post is the ultimate rating, why would anyone use anything thing else he's written about? He does not judge the system's usefulness, throughput, etc. But he's a good benchmark for distributed system's reliability. While he might not test every possible scenario, if he says software X loses data on conditions Y, I do believe him. It's still up to me to decide if that matters for my use case or not.
themartorana 11y ago
Sad that this was downvoted. I'll add an upvote because I think it's relevant.