I am hosting all of my stuff on a single VPS instance in Docker/lcx containers. It is reasonably easy to migrate stuff out if I need a larger hardware, but it's also very cheap.
Regarding scaling: a couple of years ago I ran a database on a single CPU core (because of licensing issues). It stored 50M rows a day and also executed various queries quite quickly. So I seriously doubt that most of us is going to need large clusters.
He did not say how the data was structured. Someone with simple/skinny indexes would do fine on weaker hardware than someone with complex/wide indexes on the same size dataset.
How do you figure they need Docker for that? Seems like it's what they chose, not that they had an undying belief that Docker is the One-True-Solution.
Comments
I am hosting all of my stuff on a single VPS instance in Docker/lcx containers. It is reasonably easy to migrate stuff out if I need a larger hardware, but it's also very cheap.
Regarding scaling: a couple of years ago I ran a database on a single CPU core (because of licensing issues). It stored 50M rows a day and also executed various queries quite quickly. So I seriously doubt that most of us is going to need large clusters.
50M/day on a VPS / single core, I'm having hard time believing...
No, that wasn't VPS. It's kdb.
http://pietrowski.info/2012/12/kdb-high-performance-column-o...
"1.126 million inserts per second (single insert)"
He did not say how the data was structured. Someone with simple/skinny indexes would do fine on weaker hardware than someone with complex/wide indexes on the same size dataset.
Why do you need Docker for that?
How do you figure they need Docker for that? Seems like it's what they chose, not that they had an undying belief that Docker is the One-True-Solution.