Considering trying to join cockroach labs. It seems like they could be the next databricks or snowflake. Market for distributed SQL databases will be huge, could pick up the whole Fortune 500. They have Netflix now as a customer so that’s strong validation of their tech. What do you think? TC 350
The company name though…
Considering joining on the off chance they IPO as $COCK, in which case WSB will take it to the moon.
That is why I joined
Yeah, what's with that name, geez. Other than that, I've heard great things.
Cockroaches can survive harsh conditions
the name will make wall street puke
Is distributed SQL really that lucrative? Maybe I'm just naive but haven't Amazon Aurora and Google Spanner been around for a while.
We get a lot of customers who used Aurora or Spanner.
NewSQL (or Distributed SQL as it is called now) has been around for almost a decade now and most companies in that space have failed. The database market is just a lot tougher than the data warehouse market that Snowflake and Databricks are in. There's a lot more risk with switching database vendors (if your database is down your company is down), so companies tend to stick with what they have if it works. I would join cockroach for their amazing tech, not for their upside.
Market timing is crucial, though. I think a lot of companies are much more open to distributed cloud databases than they were when the first wave of “NewSQL” came around roughly 10 years ago.
Databricks is correct in that NewSQL has failed or failed to gain traction (VoltDB, MemSQL/Singlestore, NuoDB, etc.) Databricks is also correct in that the database market is much tougher for the exact reasons listed (your warehouse can go down but your business can continue to operate, not so much for your database). NewSQL failed for the following reasons: 1) Lack of open-source (turns out customers want to have access to the code in which their data sits in, understandably so) 2) Failing to anticipate the shift to cloud. If you look at the NewSQL players, they designed their underlying architectures for on-premise deployments. 3) As an extension of reason 2, cloud vendors have provided their own database products that actually successfully killed off lots of NewSQL players who made the late transition to cloud. The traditional DBMSs (Oracle, IBM db2, MSFT SQL, etc.) and the cloud vendors with their "good enough and cheaper" solutions managed to kill off an entire generation of database startups. However, this new generation of "Distributed SQL" companies is actually getting traction because they essentially did the following: 1) Go open source 2) Be designed for the cloud So in fact, NewSQL players were correct in assuming that customers wanted distributed SQL. And to some extent, they were perhaps a bit too early. With these newer distributed SQL players, they aren't really trying to displace traditional databases but rather, addressing a need that's becoming more commonplace in an increasingly data-intensive world. And they're actually doing well by iterating upon the failures of the NewSQL players.
Yugabyte and Tidb are strong competitors too so looks like there is a good market here
OP, did you interview with them?
Op, did you join? What’s your experience like?
I don’t like the company name, i will pass ;)
You're the kind of person who invests in shiba inu, because the dog is cute!
Dont really invest into speculative stuff!! Seems like u should check ur crypto portfolio now that its tanking.