I'll likely be choosing turso going forward for projects.
We are very excited to be a part of Supabase
It should not be X times slower than SQLite.
> It was loading the data for a week already, and the speed of loading data has dropped to 4 kilobytes per second, and it will take years to load the dataset.
And then on 2nd of August
> It loaded maybe 1% of the data so far.
And then one year after
> I didn't load the data after a year. > I tried it with the fsync removed, but even then it does not work
Ok, I find this more entertaining than I should and almost unbelievable. I know that this codebase was heavily written by LLMs but the execution can't be this bad?
What am I missing and why would Supabase buy the product which can't even load the dataset properly?
The core tech is open source so that is good. Will it stay? I guess Turso hosting was not making enough revenue?
You just answered your own question. Why would anyone pay for Turso if the core of the software is available for free and being licenced permissively under MIT?
We were doing fine.
This is a strategic acquisition and I fell in love with the vision Supabase had for how they would use Turso going forward.
More to come
I would guess it's more that the founders want to exit before AI replaces them. (Based on the doom-and-gloom narrative in tech right now...)
This is a strategic acquisition and I fell in love with the vision Supabase had for how they would use Turso going forward.
More to come
Supabase is hosted Postgres with wings. Turso seemed like it would be the same but using SQLite based approach.
So either Supabase now uses the Turso sync + Postgres or something that needs Turso or abandons it. Not sure and I am not asking, just sharing my thoughts.
Love what you folks have been doing.
jackwsmth•1h ago