Hacker Newsnew | past | comments | ask | show | jobs | submitlogin

> We currently use MariaDB, with the InnoDB database engine.

Oh hey, it's not often that you hear about MySQL/MariaDB on HN, so this is a nice change. For what it's worth, it's a pretty decent database for getting things done, even if not as advanced as PostgreSQL in some respects.



I think it is also important to acknowledge that there are things innodb does better than Postgres, eg. For most workloads an undo log is a far better data structure than implementing MVCC by duplicating rows. Autovacuum and vacuum can be an absolute nightmare, plus the extra disk traffic the duplication generates. Maybe one day OrioleDb will bring this to postgres too.


I have had a MariaDB + Galera multi-master 3-node cluster running for several years, and prior to that Percona+Galera for ~5 years, and it's been just great. It stores lookup tables for our postfix mail server, fairly small databases and low hits, but it's great to just be able to reboot nodes for updates or migration to other VMs without having to do any of the old clustering gyrations.

I almost switched to CockroachDB in the last refresh, until I found that Postfix required Latin-1 encoding or something, and CockroachDB only supported UTF8. Postfix has more recently gotten a config option for changing that.


Still an order of magnitude slower / less efficient than OpenLDAP / LMDB.


The same argument came up in a big company, incidentally for the same use case, certificate store in a CA. This led to benchmarks, where OpenLDAP was significantly slower, like three orders of magnitudes. Databases have gotten really faster in the last couple of years while OpenLDAP has stagnated.


InnoDB is a bloated pig. No, it hasn't gotten 5 orders of magnitude faster in the past 10 years. http://www.lmdb.tech/bench/memcache/

And the overhead of SQL processing vs LDAP protocol hasn't improved any either.

You're spouting lies.


Got a link to a report on that?

OpenLDAP serves queries at line rate on multi-gigabit NICs, with latencies indistinguishable from ping RTTs. Other databases aren't even close.


Still completely sufficient for the workload, apparently.


Wouldn't need to upgrade server hardware as often...


Would their needs be met by a simple key-value store?




Guidelines | FAQ | Lists | API | Security | Legal | Apply to YC | Contact

Search: