firstalert acquired luma, which had acquired birdi, which was kickstarter campaign smart smoke thing, which shipped nothing to most of kickstarter backers
some m&a execs clearly did not have good vaporware detector there!!
youtube migrated away from vitess several years ago
Mysql product is circling drain under oracles direction anymore. New 8.x “innovation” releases lack any important features. even Mariadb is out executing oracle despite being broke!
Mysql community is in bad shape too. Official slack channel is avalanche of lazy newbie questions. Official linkedin group is endless spew of “learn sql cheat sheet”
Sad. It’s done for. community may still be “enormous” but that is bad thing when its communication channels overrun by sub-bootcamp-level devs
innodb supports cross-schema foreign keys, there’s no limitation to tables in a single database
can be terrible in mysql 8 though due to metadata locks now extending across foreign key boundaries. this means alter in one schema can block things in other schema if foreign key across databases
speaking of, am surprised that blog post author doesnt discuss the new mysql 8 metadata locking behavior, is new major problem with mysql foreign keys!
only oracle knows. and they don’t share answer yet, on this site or any other
only public news so far is extremely brief twitter mention of future switch to separate LTS releases from feature releases
big picture, hard to see what would motivate them to major re-invest in current mysql product model! amazon, planetscale, and co all profit off of oracle’s mysql server development efforts. and oracle does not get anything in return
assume this why more and more mysql dev efforts go to saas-only product like “mysql heatwave”!
you are spending time creating multi-year linked list of hn comments every single time a website you dislike and dont use goes down
i am “failing to address main issue of github’s downtime history”? indeed sure i am not addressing this, because it is not my care to address! why care when website i dont use and dont like goes down? not my problem!
do you see anyone else on entire hn creating redundant toplevel comments that then link to previous comment on same topic, spanning hundreds of comments across multiple years, all to post told-you-so to some random other commenters from 2-3 years ago? no one else do this, is deranged!
so, because two people said they go all in on github on an hn thread TWO YEARS AGO , you feel the need to post public i-told-you-so hundreds of times ???!???
i am amazed @dang is ok with that, it seem completely deranged man, borderline harassment
i strongly dislike planetscale and even i think this is not a useful or fair comparison .. sqlite works with local files, much simpler, no network latency, no HA
you just are not understanding my point, that does not mean i am acting in bad faith! jeez
i originally said pricing for other managed sql dbs, not specifically “serverless” ones. we both know that is just a marketing term anyway
with ACUs the point is you configure min and max, and your cluster scales up/down based on a cpu utilization threshold. so, sure reading from memory uses cpu cycles — but a large cached read is incredibly unlikely to bump you over a scaling threshold which affects your bill, unless you’re doing some huge heavy sort operations
another key point is aurora serverless v2 does not scale down to 0 acu. you are always paying a predictable small amount for your base cpu and ram. minor increases in cpu usage literally do not impact your bill at all, which is why i do not believe your argument makes sense regarding cached reads.
edit to add: the reason this matters for monetary cost of ELT/ETL is it often involves very large reads. if your jobs only extract recent/changed data, this will very likely be in buffer pool, and cost way less with io pricing than with your row based pricing. clear?
aurora serverless pricing is not based on cpu cycles. this is just not how ACUs actually work or scale or are priced, at all man
anyway i gather the answer to my question is that no, there are no other examples of managed sql dbs that bill the way you do. my complaint is this is inherently not transparent because it violates user expectations. users try comparing to io based provders and fail to understand the pricing math comparison (on io pricing 1 read = many rows) or caching implications (on io pricing, cached rows dont count as io)
as for denigrating rds, look to your ceos past hn comments. i would link to it, but last time i did that i got flagged, despite it being a recent thread that i was directly participating in
what other managed sql DBs charge based on rows read, regardless of whether they are on-disk or in-memory? honest question. i am familiar with a number of managed mysql and postgres products, and none of them bill this way that i have ever seen
and for the record, despite planetscale staffers repeatedly denigrating rds (your competitor) on hn, aurora’s patch set is not “minimal”
i do think vitess is cool for what its worth. i just think your managed db product has bananas billing and also is horrendously over hyped, and your ceo’s responses to criticism are very reminiscant of theranos or wework’s responses to same
firstalert acquired luma, which had acquired birdi, which was kickstarter campaign smart smoke thing, which shipped nothing to most of kickstarter backers
some m&a execs clearly did not have good vaporware detector there!!