ashishnm

To be clear we haven't built a SQL layer on top of FDB. It's a metadata store for us where we store objects. We haven't decided whether to open source the object-mapping layer. It's plausible, and if we do it will take some work. But we are certain to contribute to the FDB community. So do keep an eye out.

Yes, we kept using FoundationDB, primarily because of its reliability. The layers we built on top don't have knowledge of the underlying architecture.

Latter. It's a Java library used by our services.

I echo what wwilson has said. I work at Snowflake Computing, we're a SQL analytics database in the cloud, and we have been using FoundationDB as our metadata store for over 4 years. It is a truly awesome product and has proven to be rock-solid over this time. It is a core piece in our architecture, and is heavily used by all our services. Some of the layers that wwilson is talking about, we've built them. metadata storage , object-mapping layer , lock manager , notifications system . In conjunction with these layers, FoundationDB has allowed us to build features that are unique to Snowflake. Check out our blog titled, "How FoundationDB powers Snowflake Metadata forward" [1]

Kudos to the FoundationDB team and Apple for open sourcing this wonderful product. We're cheering you all along! And we look forward to contributing to the open source and community.

[1] https://www.snowflake.net/how-foundationdb-powers-snowflake-...