[muxator]

I always longed for the existence of such an Ops-friendly DB, which - building on solid distributed systems concepts - could make easy and correct the hard things (consistency, geographical replication, effective possibility of zero downtime).

Now that I have a good candidate, I find myself wondering whether the performances would be good enough to ditch traditional DBs (I know: I should define "workload" before thinking about "performances"...)

I guess is the curse of tradeoffs: nothing in life is free.

[jinqueeny]

Another good candidate is TiDB (https://github.com/pingcap/tidb). It has elastic scalability, ACID compliances, high availability, etc.

At least, TiDB, CRDB, RethinkDB are open source :)

[zokier]

> At least, TiDB, CRDB, RethinkDB are open source :)

So is CockroachDB too?

[a-robinson]

Yes: https://github.com/cockroachdb/cockroach

The parent poster was referring to CockroachDB as CRDB.

[jinqueeny]

Yep, thanks for your clarification!

[arrty88]

We had it with RethinkDB already!

[manigandham]

Except it has lacking performance and is now impractical without a backing support company.

[a012]

Does rethinkdb have ACID? No?

[elvinyung]

Whether that actually matters is arguable: No one has performant distributed (i.e. cross-partition) ACID. (Except maybe Google.)

For the thing that does matter, which is ACID within the same partition/entity group, I would argue that RethinkDB already does have that.

Mike Stonebraker says that there are no fast distributed transactions [1]. I'm inclined to believe him, and that's not just an appeal to authority.

[1] https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=KRcecxdGxvQ&t=54m22s