
Google F1 vs. FoundationDB's SQL Layer - aritraghosh007
https://foundationdb.com/blog/7-things-that-make-google-f1-and-the-foundationdb-sql-layer-so-strikingly-similar
======
rdtsc
The tough sell for me is -- I don't see the source code. 10 whitepapers and 15
blog posts comparing to Google doesn't add to credibility. That works for
investors and for fun recreational reading. Show me how you do write locking,
let's see your cluster membership module.

Perhaps, they want to be Oracle or DB2, that's fine, and I understand that,
different market perhaps. But they don't have the credibility those companies
do. Even Google's F1 has more credibility because well, because of brand name
recognition.

Look at these other DB products I might want to choose, all with available
source code: RethinkDB, PostreSQL, Riak, CouchDB, SQLite, MariaDB, MongoDB,
Couchbase, Cassandra.

At this point, databases are a bit like operating system, there is no way I am
picking a closed source operating system if I have a choice. It is just too
critical of a component to be closed under a sealed lid.

Yes they all have different features and maybe FoundationDB does something
better, I will still put it last in whatever category, just because I want to
be able to look at how it works.

~~~
bitdiddle
agreed! I just downloaded and installed and can't for the life of me find the
source code.

perhaps by open source they mean the collection of clients on Github

~~~
Dave_Rosenthal
The SQL layer (which is compared to Google F1 in the blog post) is open-source
(it is not yet released; an older version is on GitHub:
[https://github.com/FoundationDB/sql-
layer](https://github.com/FoundationDB/sql-layer)). This means that the SQL
parser, query planner, execution engine, etc. can all be audited, examined,
and changed.

You are correct that the FoundationDB storage engine itself (transactional
key-value store) is closed-source. (It is free for production use in smaller
cluster, and available for license for larger clusters.)

~~~
bitdiddle
Thanks for the clarification, my interest was academic and piqued by the use
of hierarchical structures. Best of luck with it!

------
spullara
My investment in these guys was announced this morning. I've been talking with
them for over a year, one of my other portfolio companies is using it in
production and I can't say enough good things about the rigor used to develop
it. Honestly it is easy to be skeptical of their claims, but I think that if
you dig in you will find that they are true.

[https://foundationdb.com/blog/foundationdb-
raises-17-million...](https://foundationdb.com/blog/foundationdb-
raises-17-million-series-a)

~~~
eonil
This is real big news! This blows out the concern for long term product
availability, and will make more conservative people to adapt the product.

------
_stephan
An ordered key-value store with consistent secondary indices and simple
transactions covers the needs of lots of applications (as e.g. the Google App
Engine data store proves). If FoundationDB can indeed deliver consistency
without compromising performance and scalability, they will probably have a
bright future.

------
Filligree
This reads like a thinly disguised ad to me.

"We all know that Google's stuff is excellent. Now, here's how we're doing the
same thing..."

