yugabyte-db

Note that prior to its license change ScyllaDB was using AGPL. This is a fully FLOSS license but may have been viewed nonetheless as somewhat unfriendly by potential outside contributors. The ScyllaDB license change was really more about not wanting to expend development effort on maintaining multiple versions of the code (AGPL licensed and fully proprietary), so they went for sort of a split-the-difference approach where the fully proprietary version was in turn made source-available. (Notably, they're not arguing that open source reusers have been "unfair" to them and freeloaded on their effort, which was the key justification many others gave for relicensing their code under non-FLOSS terms.) In case anyone here is looking for a fully-FLOSS contender that they may want to perhaps contribute to, there's the interesting project Yugabyt

Not sure about the CLA process, but the database is already under a restrictive, proprietary license: ## Free Trial Use to evaluate whether the software suits a particular application for less than 32 consecutive calendar days, on behalf of you or your company, is use for a permitted purpose. https://github.com/yugabyte/yugabyte-db/blob/master/licenses... It's not really clear what this means (what is a permitted purpose?), but it seems the intent is that after 32 days, you are expected to pay up. Or at least prepare for a future when the infrastructure to charge customers is in place (if it isn't there yet).

One thing possibly holding some folks back is the version of Postgres it's held back to. Right now YDB has PostgreSQL 12 comparability. Support for PG15 is under active development, so hopefully it's a 2025 feature. I really wanted to be able to actually use YugabyteDB for once, but our developers reportedly are using PG15+ features. https://github.com/yugabyte/yugabyte-db/issues/9797

Thanks for pointing out Yugabyte. I did a search for performance comparisons and there seems (seemed?) to be some performance issues at least back in 2023 https://github.com/yugabyte/yugabyte-db/issues/10108 hopeful performance has improved since

It can be done like https://github.com/yugabyte/yugabyte-db/ has.

Interestingly enough, the new CDC SDK in YugabyteDB 2.13 supports DDL statements as well: https://github.com/yugabyte/yugabyte-db/blob/398a2b1a460ed8f....

May I suggest looking at YugabyteDB, which is a distributed SQL database built on actual PostgreSQL 11.2 engine? It's way ahead of CockroachDB in terms of feature support. YugabyteDB has UDFs, stored procedures, distributed transactions, the range types are working from what I can tell, at least the example from here: https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Extract_days_from_range_typ... works right out of the box, just copy paste. Postgres extensions are of course working. Orafce, postgis (with extra work needed for gin indexes, afair...), custom extensions. YugabyteBD == Postgres. The query planner, analyzer and executor are all Postgres. Mind you, some features are not readily available because handling them properly in a distributed manner takes effort. Those unsupported features are disabled on the grammar level, before being worked on. But

> I wonder if this works with yugabyte It should work too! Check this line here[1]. That shows that Yugabyte also has the `ProcessUtility_hook`(same one used in the article) defined. It would be a matter of installing and loading the Supautils extension. [1]: https://github.com/yugabyte/yugabyte-db/blob/master/src/post...

As Kyle mentioned << Because these problems involve schema changes (e.g. creating tables), they may not impact users frequently. YugaByte doesn't think they're relevant to the core transactional mechanism in YugaByte DB, which is why they're not discussing them when they say "Jepsen tests passed". >> the impact of this is very limited, and not core to the transactional mechanism in YugabyteDB. Most "Distributed DB" vendors do not support transactional DDL yet to our knowledge, and haven't been subjected to this specific test. In any case, I have updated the post/blog to clarify this: << Given that DocDB, Yugabyte DB’s underlying distributed document store, is common across both the YCQL and YSQL APIs, it was no surprise that YSQL passed official Jepsen run safety tests relatively easily (with the exception of transactional DDL support, wh

Thx @truth_seeker. YugabyteDB CDC support is in early beta right now. To read more: https://github.com/YugaByte/yugabyte-db/blob/master/architec...

hi @mpercy, Thanks for correcting me on the dynamic consensus membership change. Looks like the basic support was indeed there, but several important enhancements were needed (for correctness and usability). - To make the "online" piece of the membership change work correctly we added support for LEARNER (PRE VOTER) role (where the new member enters in a non-voting mode till it's caught up). https://github.com/YugaByte/yugabyte-db/commit/909d26e31ecd0.... - Load Balancing (which uses the membership changes) is automatic. (https://github.com/YugaByte/yugabyte-db/commit/e4667eb7ec0e6...) - Remote bootstrap (due to membership changes) also has undergone substantial changes given that YugaByte DB uses a customize/extended version of RocksDB as the storage engine and does a tighter coupling of Raft with RocksDB storage engine. (https://github.

Yes, it does. At the core, the raft implementation is still based on kudu's. But, these areas have been worked on actively so the implementations might has diverged a little. May be worth looking through the individual issues to see what applies and what doesn't: https://github.com/YugaByte/yugabyte-db/projects/11