| Lots of comments! I'll try to address the key points: Re: "brand new technology not yet in trunk" -- I'm not sure what you mean by that. Bedrock has been used continuously for 8 years. Re: "struggles over high-latency, low-reliability WAN connections" -- Ah, I mean MySQL's replication is designed for active/passive deployments with manual failover connected via fast/reliable networks. Not saying it can't support slow/unreliable WAN connections, only that it requires a lot of glue code and manual recovery when things go more wrong thn it's designed to handle. Re: "the engineering required to correctly implement this distributed system is genuinely challenging" -- Agreed! This is precisely what Bedrock provides. Re: "SQL fanout" -- To my knowledge, no RDBMS does this automatically. Furthermore, very few real world applications actually require this. Don't get me wrong: this is cool stuff. But this isn't a common requirement. Most businesses will never exceed the capacity of a single server -- the number of businesses that truly require this level of scalability is very small. Re: "I just don't understand what niche Bedrock is trying to fill." -- The niche of businesses that want a simple SQL database that has built in automatic failover. Re: "multiple logical SQL instances" -- I'm not sure what you mean by this. Bedrock maintains a single contiguous SQL database across all nodes. Re: "you only get as much read throughput for as much data as you are willing to duplicate" -- Yes, I'm saying there are very few reasons not to duplicate it all for the vast majority of real world use cases. Thanks! |