mirror of
https://github.com/dragonflydb/dragonfly.git
synced 2025-05-10 18:05:44 +02:00
5b6bf1fa96
* chore: License update Fixes #2758 --------- Signed-off-by: Roman Gershman <roman@dragonflydb.io>
51 lines
3.9 KiB
Markdown
51 lines
3.9 KiB
Markdown
# Dragonfly Frequently Asked Questions
|
|
|
|
- [Dragonfly Frequently Asked Questions](#dragonfly-frequently-asked-questions)
|
|
- [What is the license model of Dragonfly? Is it an open source?](#what-is-the-license-model-of-dragonfly-is-it-an-open-source)
|
|
- [Can I use dragonfly in production?](#can-i-use-dragonfly-in-production)
|
|
- [We benchmarked Dragonfly and we have not reached 4M qps throughput as you advertised.](#we-benchmarked-dragonfly-and-we-have-not-reached-4m-qps-throughput-as-you-advertised)
|
|
- [Dragonfly provides vertical scale, but we can achieve similar throughput with X nodes in a Redis cluster.](#dragonfly-provides-vertical-scale-but-we-can-achieve-similar-throughput-with-x-nodes-in-a-redis-cluster)
|
|
- [If only Dragonfly had this command I would use it for sure](#if-only-dragonfly-had-this-command-i-would-use-it-for-sure)
|
|
|
|
|
|
## What is the license model of Dragonfly? Is it an open source?
|
|
Dragonfly is released under [BSL 1.1](../LICENSE.md) (Business Source License).
|
|
BSL 1.1 is considered to be "source available" license and it's not strictly open-source license.
|
|
We believe that a [BSL 1.1](https://spdx.org/licenses/BUSL-1.1.html) license is more permissive
|
|
than licenses like AGPL, and it will allow us to
|
|
provide a competitive commercial service using our technology. In general terms,
|
|
it means that Dragonfly's code is free to use and free to change as long as you do not sell services directly related to
|
|
Dragonfly or in-memory datastores.
|
|
We followed the trend of other technological companies like Elastic, Redis, MongoDB, Cockroach labs,
|
|
Redpanda Data to protect our rights to provide service and support for the software we are building.
|
|
|
|
## Can I use dragonfly in production?
|
|
License wise you are free to use dragonfly in your production as long as you do not provide Dragonfly as a managed service.
|
|
From a code maturity point of view, Dragonfly's code is covered with unit testing and the regression tests.
|
|
However as with any new software there are use cases that are hard to test and predict.
|
|
We advise you to run your own particular use case on dragonfly for a few days before considering production usage.
|
|
|
|
## We benchmarked Dragonfly and we have not reached 4M qps throughput as you advertised.
|
|
We conducted our experiments using a load-test generator called `memtier_benchmark`,
|
|
and we run benchmarks on AWS network-enhanced instance `c6gn.16xlarge` on recent Linux kernel versions.
|
|
Dragonfly might reach smaller throughput on other instances, but we would
|
|
still expect to reach around 1M+ qps on instances with 16-32 vCPUs.
|
|
|
|
## Dragonfly provides vertical scale, but we can achieve similar throughput with X nodes in a Redis cluster.
|
|
Dragonfly optimizes the use of underlying hardware, allowing it to run efficiently on instances as small as 8GB,
|
|
and scale vertically to large 2TB machines with 128 cores. This versatility significantly
|
|
reduces the complexity of running cluster workloads on a single node, saving hardware resources and costs.
|
|
More importantly, it diminishes the total cost
|
|
of ownership associated with managing multi-node clusters. In contrast, Redis in cluster
|
|
mode imposes limitations on multi-key and transactional operations, whereas Dragonfly maintains
|
|
the same semantics as a single-node Redis system.
|
|
Furthermore, scaling out horizontally with small instances can lead to instability
|
|
in production environments.
|
|
We believe that large-scale deployments of in-memory stores require both vertical and horizontal scaling,
|
|
which is not efficiently achievable with an in-memory store like Redis.
|
|
|
|
## If only Dragonfly had this command I would use it for sure
|
|
Dragonfly implements ~190 Redis commands which we think represent a good coverage of the market.
|
|
However this is not based empirical data. Having said that, if you have commands that are not covered,
|
|
please feel free to open an issue for that or vote for an existing issue.
|
|
We will do our best to prioritise those commands according to their popularity.
|