Comment by slashdave Comment by slashdave 16 hours ago 5 replies Copy Link View on Hacker News Sure. Now keep everything in memory and use redis or memcache. Easy to get performance if you change the rules.
Copy Link koakuma-chan 16 hours ago Next Collapse Comment - You can use SQLite for persistence and a hash map as cache. Or just go for Mongo since it's web scale. Reply View | 0 replies
Copy Link Yodan2025 14 hours ago Prev Next Collapse Comment - yep, then add an AWS worker in-between Reply View | 0 replies
Copy Link SJC_Hacker 12 hours ago Prev Collapse Comment - SQLite can also do in memory Reply View | 2 replies Copy Link slashdave 11 hours ago Parent Collapse Comment - Yeah, very good point. It all comes down to requirements. If you require persistence, then we can start talking about redundancy and backup, and then suddenly this performance metric becomes far less relevant. Reply View | 1 reply Copy Link andersmurphy 5 hours ago Root Parent Collapse Comment - Backups are to the second with litestream. Reply View | 0 replies
Copy Link slashdave 11 hours ago Parent Collapse Comment - Yeah, very good point. It all comes down to requirements. If you require persistence, then we can start talking about redundancy and backup, and then suddenly this performance metric becomes far less relevant. Reply View | 1 reply Copy Link andersmurphy 5 hours ago Root Parent Collapse Comment - Backups are to the second with litestream. Reply View | 0 replies
Copy Link andersmurphy 5 hours ago Root Parent Collapse Comment - Backups are to the second with litestream. Reply View | 0 replies
You can use SQLite for persistence and a hash map as cache. Or just go for Mongo since it's web scale.