‹ BackHN Continuity

Thread

Tin: full-text search for Postgres

230 points · 98 comments · ksec

  1. Tiberium · · focus · HN ↗
    If anyone&#x27;s curious - <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;planetscale.com&#x2F;docs&#x2F;postgres&#x2F;search&#x2F;get-started#local-development-and-ci" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;planetscale.com&#x2F;docs&#x2F;postgres&#x2F;search&#x2F;get-started#loc...:

    They&#x27;re not providing a local extension with the same performance at the time - it&#x27;s only offered on their cloud services.

    The local version <a href="https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;planetscale&#x2F;lead" rel="nofollow">https:&#x2F;&#x2F;github.com&#x2F;planetscale&#x2F;lead is mainly just for testing the syntax, it doesn&#x27;t have the same perf characteristics.

    1. noir_lord · · focus · HN ↗
      Becoming more the norm for them, Neki is the same.

      Immediately rules out ever using them (though I don&#x27;t currently have any problems that would benefit from that level of scale currently, have in the past though).

      Postgres&#x27;s license allows this but for me (personally) it leaves a bad taste.

      Also it&#x27;s not really &quot;full-text search for Postgres&quot; it&#x27;s &quot;full-text search for our hosted version of Postgres&quot; so the title is a little misleading.

      1. zombodb · · focus · HN ↗
        Why don’t you like Postgres’ license? It’s as permissive as a license gets.
        1. noir_lord · · focus · HN ↗
          Building non-open extensions on top of it, it&#x27;s not the license I don&#x27;t like, the bad taste is that they use something open extend it and keep part of it closed.

          The license allows it but on the flip side it&#x27;s vendor lock-in predicated on using something open as the base.

          Fully proprietary no issue with that, full open, no issue with that, building proprietary on top of open is where the bad taste comes in.

          For completeness, it&#x27;s not them specifically either, the other cloud companies do similar things and I suspect in part the reason they don&#x27;t open these extensions up is because the others will but then they are doing the same thing themselves.

          1. collinmcnulty · · focus · HN ↗
            I find this attitude self-defeating because the lure of being able to provide some amount of proprietary software on top of open is what draws in the corporate investment in open software. And in the system we live in, it’s hard to imagine there’d be nearly as much open software as there is without that corporate investment. As a big fan of open software, this seems like a great trade to me.

            (Disclosure: I work for a company with this business model, in part because I like working on open software)

            1. xnickb · · focus · HN ↗
              So you are saying &quot;don&#x27;t hate the player&quot;, but hating the game is a big nono. That thing that isn&#x27;t capitalism is inherently evil and should be avoided like a plague
              1. collinmcnulty · · focus · HN ↗
                I don’t understand your comment, can you elaborate? I’m saying that drawing corporate investment into open software is preferable to all of that investment going into proprietary software. I want as much open software as possible and I want us to be practical at all levels. Big swings like public grants and a better safety net (even UBI) are things I’m supportive of too, and can coexist with incentives for drawing in corporates. There’s a certain purism argument that a company that is involved in open software is constantly criticized for being insufficiently open but a proprietary software company receives no such similar criticism, which I think is irrational.
                1. xnickb · · focus · HN ↗
                  I don&#x27;t know which exact company you are talking about. I see most proprietary companies heavily criticized and do so myself and used to heavily advocate for OSS at $work. My current work is 99.9% opensource.

                  As for my point, the main issue you are pointing out is the fundamental flaw in capitalism: companies focus on profit instead of technological progress. The two can be correlated but that isn&#x27;t granted. See enshittification.

                  There are other economical models that could potentially address the shortcomings of capitalism but a lot of effort is put into discrediting socialist&#x2F;communist ideas as they threaten the wealth of the wealthiest.

Open on Hacker News to reply ↗

Unofficial Hacker News client; not affiliated with Y Combinator.