DSQL looks like a Big Deal to me - solving the essential scaling bottleneck that relational DBs give you without ending up with a weird system like dynamodb that no one wants to use.
Why aren't more people talking about it?
blm126•24m ago
For me, the primary issue with it is that I have zero intention of getting locked in to AWS. All the marketing looks great, but I don’t invest energy learning tools I can’t run locally. I’m happy to use AWS but only if I can see the exit. This doesn’t offer near enough to make me break that rule.
pepperoni_pizza•15m ago
DSQL has some serious limitations (transaction size, but also others). I would say working with it feels more like Dynamo than Postgres.
Which is fine - it is a specialized system designed for specialized problems, not a drop in replacement for Postgres that would make your application magically multi-region.
Also, I'm not sure if it actually solves any scaling bottlenecks. Any distributed system that needs to reach consensus will be as slow or slower than single node, which does not need to do it. Yes, usual implementations only go through consensus for writing and reading isn't constrained ... but you can already do that with read-only replica of a normal database.
loevborg•45m ago
Why aren't more people talking about it?
blm126•24m ago
pepperoni_pizza•15m ago
Which is fine - it is a specialized system designed for specialized problems, not a drop in replacement for Postgres that would make your application magically multi-region.
Also, I'm not sure if it actually solves any scaling bottlenecks. Any distributed system that needs to reach consensus will be as slow or slower than single node, which does not need to do it. Yes, usual implementations only go through consensus for writing and reading isn't constrained ... but you can already do that with read-only replica of a normal database.