But since there was no open source software available for this usecase back then, they did write their own, which became Cassandra and HBase. And now these SSTable type of solutions have become the de facto standard for write-optimized databases.
If Tokutek had open sourced TokuDB from the very beginning things could have turned out very differently. TofuDB had an huge advantage over Cassandra/HBase in being SQL-oriented and based on MySQL, whereas Cassandra/HBase required a much steeper learning curve. But since TokuDB was proprietary, it never really gained much traction.
AFAIK, TokuDB is the only write-optimized transactional data store. We (I work at Tokutek) are working on integrating with MongoDB as we speak, and when we do, we will bring transactional semantics to MongoDB in addition to improved performance.
So, I think there is still a big demand out there that TokuDB will be able to meet
You'd arguably be taking a risk by choosing a centralized database for write-heavy applications, which are the hardest to scale, but I could see it as a good fit for the applications where people currently use sharded MySQL.
"Database Error: Error establishing a database connection"
Here's an academic paper from a few years ago from some of the people involved: http://supertech.csail.mit.edu/papers/sbtree.pdf
And a more recent talk focused on TokuDB: http://www.bnl.gov/csc/seminars/abstracts/Bender_Presentatio...
Also, we're on github: http://github.com/Tokutek and on IRC at #tokutek on irc.freenode.net, so come hang out!
I'd really like to see TokuDB discuss its patents, why they have them, and what they intend to do with them. I'd like to see a page like that from every corporation on their website actually.
Can we please let this disingenuous argument die already? Yes, in theory they can spring up in many minds independently. In practice they rarely do unless they are trivial. If the alleged disparate inventors can prove they came up with it independently, fine; the onus is on them.
Curious outsider here, and understand that all IANAL caveats apply.
But, this isn't my area. I only have a passing understanding of Dancing Trees (my previous business led me to following ReiserFS closely, but I haven't paid any attention to filesystem or database performance in 7+ years), and no real understanding of Fractal Trees. I'm glad it's Open Source, however, and thanks for the pointers.
Thanks for the interesting reference!
For companies wary of v3 for other reasons, I wonder if there's an easy/semi-standardized way to tack on a patent grant? I'd feel much safer using open-source software licensed under some kind of "MIT + patent grant" or "GPLv2 + patent grant" license than the vanilla versions.
Indemnification is a completely different issue: no open source software that I know of provides any kind of indemnification which would protect you from a lawsuit by a third party.
Eg if I write some apache2 Haskell code that can interact seamlessly with the rest of the storage engine implementation, and I swap that part In, is that still the same implementation?
I suppose that idemnification from code patent issues is probably part of the commercial license / product then?
We are working to get the site back up (a simple Wordpress site set up by the marketing department that does not use our database). In the meantime, please take a look at http://mwne.ws/124r2GL
Thanks for all the comments. We clearly didn't anticipate this level of excitement, but are grateful for the interest.
Thanks for all the interest and for your patience...
"Tools such as Hot Backup (coming soon) allow a backup to be completed while database is running."
- Does that mean that someone using the opensource version would be unable to take a backup of a running database?
- snapshots (LVM, EBS, etc...)
- cold backups
- mysqldump (with MVCC, this is technically hot)