Hacker News new | ask | show | jobs
by jtuple 4033 days ago
To be honest, the repositioning isn't really a response to the brain drain -- it's a reflection of a changing culture at Basho that was the cause of the brain drain in the first place.

The primary reason I left Basho is that I felt the company was turning into a "don't invent here" culture, the polar opposite of "not invented here". The goal was no longer to solve hard distributed systems problems and build amazing technology, but to just integrate various "trendy" technologies and make an enterprise simplification play.

The problem is that most of these other technologies have major failings and/or punt on the corner cases that us old time Basho engineers obsessed over.

The whole point of Riak was to be the most highly available, fault tolerant, trusted database you could use. You can't just integrate Riak with arbitrary products X, Y, and Z without compromising on those core tenants.

I really hope Basho can deliver on the promises they're making about this data platform product. I really do. But, for various reasons I can't really talk about, I'd say I'm extremely skeptical.

(BTW, for those that don't know me: I'm a former Principal Engineer at Basho and was the lead developer on a variety of sub-systems in Riak over the last four years)

2 comments

Thanks for the context - I'm not sure if we've met, but I definitely know and respect your work. Of course there are compromises with this approach, but unfortunately I need a set of capabilities that are not currently available from a single source. Ultimately this just another entrant in a field of options, some of which have evolved in a similarly ad hoc fashion (though one I'm looking at has been under development for 25 years). I hope it can at least hold its own.
Would you still recommend using Riak?
Riak is a great product/technology. I have no idea what the future of Riak looks like, but Riak in it's current form is something I still highly recommend. Just keep in mind that Riak works best for pure key/value workloads -- most of Riak's other features are (as they've been for years) hit/miss.
I used Riak for several years and was a big fan (still am of that version) but I migrated to CouchBase because it had some key features that were important to me that Riak lacked (Riak was just a KV store at that point).

I'm very happy with CouchBase and I feel like they are way ahead of everyone else in terms of skating to where there puck is going to be. In fact, at the time I was using Riak they were moving very fast engineering wise and building great stuff- and CouchBase was still figuring out what it wanted to be when it grew up (with the merger of Membase and CouchDB/CouchIO). Now the roles are reversed. CouchBase is the one that's moving fast without breaking stuff.

To be honest, I think CouchBase is the secret sauce of what I'm doing. I laugh at all the MongoDB posts on HN especially given so rarely that CouchBase gets mentioned.

I'm not bashing Riak- it's solidly engineered.

Good info. Currently considering CouchBase vs Riak for pure K/V use case. Had been leaning CouchBase and this reinforces that.
I would also like to know the answer to this. Specifically, riak CS. It seems to have been passed by other technologies in the space. It also has some really bizarre requirements (like 1 disk per node).
Unfortunately, Riak CS (as of today now rebranded Riak S2, apparently), is something I don't have enough personal experience with to really have an opinion on.