Y
HN Search
Hacker News Search
new
|
comments
|
top
|
jobs
tommyzli
searching PlanetScale…
1.
▲
2.
▲
3.
▲
4.
▲
5.
▲
6.
▲
14 ms
·
1.
▲
by
tommyzli
2y ago
Just last week I started hacking on a k8s operator for managing postgres roles, grants and databases. I really like the continuous reconciliation for this scenario, especially having previously worked at places that managed this with shell
2.
▲
by
tommyzli
3y ago
I'm curious to hear more about your troubles with alloydb. It's something I just started to test out at work
3.
▲
by
tommyzli
4y ago
the last time I gave the Postgres operator space a serious look was about a year ago, and at the time the Zalando operator was far and away the most feature complete and mature. We had a couple unusual requirements that the operator wasn&#x
4.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
Wow, I wasn't expecting such an in-depth response! It sounds like making user profiles a reference table would solve the cross-shard join problem, but what would the performance implications look like? The docs just say that it does a
5.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
1. You'll have to define "slow" - I have a 3TB table where an index only scan takes under 1ms 2. hot_standby_feedback is absolutely safe. I've got 5 hot standbys in prod with that flag enabled 3. Again, it depends on how
6.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
Believe it or not these numbers are actually from _after_ me and some others spent a few weeks cleaning up our heavier queries
7.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
TIL, this is really good to know! Do you know offhand if this is a new feature, or have I just always been wrong
8.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
It's not in the post, but I answered this in a separate thread. RDS doesn't let us provision as many IOPS as we need. Apparently Aurora behaves differently, but I wasn't aware of that when we specced out the project.
9.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
Nope.
10.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
We are living life on the edge to an extent, but we have 5 hot standbys across AZs and regular backups + WAL archives to S3. May not be as durable as EBS, but it's enough for me to sleep soundly at night. And with a highly concurrent W
11.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
Apparently I'm living in the twilight zone because I have a vivid memory of reading the Aurora docs and seeing the same limit. Oh well, it's something to consider for the next upgrade.
12.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
basically what paulryanrogers said. We thought about migrating to Citus, but I don't have a good idea of how to shard our dataset efficiently. If we were to shard by user id, then creating a match between two people would require cross
13.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
ants_a is correct. Also, our NVMe storage is ephemeral so you aren't recovering from a power loss anyways :)
14.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
How would that have worked with multiple replicas cascading from the new primary? Streaming replication doesn't work across versions, so would we have had to build out a tree of new instances, then pg_upgrade them all at the same time?
15.
▲
by
tommyzli
6y ago
Thanks! We stuck with plain EC2. RDS has a limit of 80,000 provisioned IOPS and our read replicas on Postgres 9.6 would regularly hit near double that during peak
16.
▲
Our Journey to PostgreSQL 12
(tech.coffeemeetsbagel.com)
215 points
by
tommyzli
6y ago
|
114 comments