Hacker News Reader

Its a financial database built for use cases where this invariant holds and built for enabling new use cases where this invariant prevented businesses from expanding into new industries. The creator says as much:

> Without much sweat for general purpose workloads.

View on HN

Having a niche and expanding into new industries are all fine, there is no problem with having a DB filling a particular sub-segment of the market.

But writing that traditional SQL databases cannot go above these "100-1000 TPS" numbers due to Amdahl's law is going to raise some eyebrows.

> But writing that traditional SQL databases cannot go above these "100-1000 TPS" numbers due to Amdahl's law is going to raise some eyebrows.

I don't think that's controversial. Amdahl's law applies to all software. Its not a peculiar feature of SQL databases. The comment is well-contextualized, in my view, but reasonable minds may disagree.

He clearly says this is in the context of "transaction processing" in the comment you're responding to.

You’re changing the subject to the company’s mission when the concern was about a specific claim made.

A specific claim about OLTP processing under contention. Or how would you characterize the specific claim, specifically?

Reply on news.ycombinator.com