Re: PostgreSQL as a Service - Mailing list pgsql-general

On 18/7/19 5:23 μ.μ., Dirk Riehle wrote:
> Hello everyone!
>
> tl;dr: How well is PostgreSQL positioned to serve as the database of choice for a DBaaS operator? Specifically, how
muchopen source is (may be) missing?
 
>
> ----
>
> Im un-lurking hoping to learn more about PostgreSQL in DBaaS land.
>
> You may have seen this announcement.
>
> https://blog.yugabyte.com/why-we-changed-yugabyte-db-licensing-to-100-open-source/
>
> YugaByte bills itself as a PostgreSQL compatible database (yay to at least the intent) but most importantly, it
decidedto single-license its database under a permissive license, including "the 
 
> enterprise features" that frequently are held back by single-vendor open source firms who want to earn a RoI for
theirVC investment.
 
>
> The interesting part (and why I'm posting it here) is the following staging of functionality implied in that post.
>
> 1. Core database (permissively licensed)
> 2. Enterprise features (permissively licensed)
> 3. DBaaS features (trial license, commercial, no open source)
> 4. Managed by YugaByte (commercial)
>
> Point 3. suggests that they want to make money from self-managed DBaaS, but in the post they also write they really
onlyexpect significant income from 4, i.e. YugaByte (the database) managed by 
 
> YugaByte (the company).
>
> Where is PostgreSQL in relation to this?
>
> 1. PostgreSQL itself is certainly 1 above, the core database.
>
> 2. PostgreSQL permissive license allows commercial offerings to build and not share enterprise features (and I'm sure
somecompanies are holding back). However, PostgreSQL is true community open 
 
> source so whatever enterprise features become relevant, they'll eventually be commoditized and out in the open. Is
therea lot that is missing? And that some companies have but are not contributing?
 
>
> 3. So, PostgreSQL as-a-service. There are several companies (plenty?) who service PostgreSQL. I wonder how this is
beingshared back? I don't have a clear picture here, my impression is that the 
 
> software to run these potentially large farms is proprietary? Or, that operators would argue, this is all
configurationand shell scripts and not really shareable open source?
 
>
> One aspect related to as-a-service is scaling out, i.e. not just having many small customers, but also serving large
customersin the cloud. I looked around for scaling out solutions. There used to 
 
> be CitusData (not any longer it seems), there is PostgresXL which seems to be moving slowly. Is that it?
There is also the Bidirectional Replication project (BDR). Also Why the comment about CitusData? I would the guess the
oppositeis true.
 
>
> 4. Managed DBaaS is not relevant here but always a commercial offering.
>
> So, back to my main question above. If I wanted to run a DBaaS shop with only PostgreSQL open source, how far away
frombeing able to compete with AWS or Azure (or YugaByte for that matter) would I be?
 
>
> Thanks for any thoughts and opinions! Dirk
>


-- 
Achilleas Mantzios
IT DEV Lead
IT DEPT
Dynacom Tankers Mgmt