[flagged24]

I once tried both of these databases with an existing PostgreSQL database. I was never able to convert my pg database to YugabyteDB, YugabyteDB Voyager (a migration tool) would choke during the conversion/migration. I did manage to get a working CockroachDB version but had to drop quite a bit of features and consistency checks. I remember not being impressed with the added latency. Lessons learned: don't migrate existing projects to these distributed databases and only use them in new projects when you are in dire need of a distributed database and are comfortable with the added latency. Mind you, this was quite some time ago, I'm sure things have improved.

[franckpachot]

(YugabyteDB Developer Advocate here)

@flagged24 If you can send me more info about your migration problems, I would love to look at it ([e-mail]). The postgres-compatibility, performance, and YB Voyager are improving from feedback.

The default parameters may not be the best to try an existing app. Here is a docker image I've made with the best defaults for a quick start: https://github.com/FranckPachot/yb-pglike to check the compatibility, and then look at more tuning.

@gunapologist99 I'm not a big fan of benchmarks, especially on products with fast evolution. The best is to test with something that is similar to your app and open an issue (github, forum, slack) if it is slow to be sure it's not a configuration issue, or bug recently fixed.

Franck

[flagged24]

Thanks, will do when I give it another try.

[motarddba]

TL;DR: you need to study both to get your best (performance-)results. These "serverless" or multi-server (and attempting multi-location) databases may well be the next wave of databases. CRDB and YB: They both take a postgres (or wire compatible ;-) front-end and Rocks-db storage behind that. Both also seem to prefer DBaaS rather than DIY-deployment. Last summer, I did brief few weeks of testing of both. For curiosity, not for performance. Both seem easy to deploy on servers or as containers/pods etc.. For Efficiency (performance), Especially for Yugabyte, you Need to Know a little about their sharding. If doing default initial deploy, just dump + ingest (?) will generally give you un-favorable storage for any smalll-ish table. Mainly bcse YB seems to assume you need Everything Sharded Everywhere (their storage mechanism seems to favour single-large-table models). Resilience wise, both are good, but again, you should know a little about their engineering to get Good Benefits. In all cases, bcse the "distributed" nature: Latency is probably going to be your Main Enemy.

[gunapologist99]

Thank you! Any data points are better than none!

[flagged24]

Definitely. There is very little talk/discussion about these databases apart from evangelist articles. That's another reason for me to be hesitant to migrate. Still have a ping/alert whenever someone mentions these databases on HN.