Firestore also differs a lot from Cloud Spanner, most notably in the way that it can be used directly on the client, whereas Cloud Spanner is meant to be used in combination with a server side application.
330 karma · joined February 11, 2016
Firestore also differs a lot from Cloud Spanner, most notably in the way that it can be used directly on the client, whereas Cloud Spanner is meant to be used in combination with a server side application.
This creates great looking results pretty fast and also enables you to easily give back to the community by open-sourcing your own components. Last time I checked already 1100 components were listed, of which the vast majority seemed really well build.
I feel like Hacker News is pretty much the best example for the concepts mentioned in the blog post and it proofs that beeing fast can be a sites main feature (or one of them).
[0] https://www.hetzner.de/de/hosting/produkte_rootserver/px61nv...
As a user of Firebase about a year ago I saw much, much higher egress traffic from the Real-time database than I expected. To be specific, for testing purposes I set up a note-taking app, which (being a test) had the database size of 31kb. But here comes the weird part: by querying the database exactly 10 times, my console was showing 24.5mb of traffic, which is much higher than 31*10=310kb/0.31mb.
Ultimately this caused me to change tracks to an open-source alternative, but if changes would be made on that front I'd be willing to take another dive into Firebase.
YCombinator shouldn't let companies use Hacker News as a marketing tool, at least not to the extent Google does.
It might not be so well known, but I found http://www.deepstream.io to have a relatively similar feature set, without having to deal with bad support (if it bothers you, just fix it yourself) and high prices, since you are the one who picks what suits you best.
The option to export your users data in a RethinkDB compatible manner would probably do the job too.
Data driven applications on AWS are already expensive because of the high traffic costs, but storing/serving media on S3 single handedly lets your bill explode. For everyone who feels like the statements above are exaggerations, just check out their actual prices (https://aws.amazon.com/ec2/pricing/on-demand/) in comparison with a regular CDN (https://www.stackpath.com/pricing/).