alt Hacker NewsSo, the general architecture described here is solid, and I support it, but I take issue with the "Lakebase" naming thing.
Disaggregated storage and disaggregated compute have been an open trend in DBMS development for the last half-decade. This is an obvious move with modern computing paradigms, and the academic literature has a standard name for it.
This feels like "JAMStack" from Netlify happening all over again.
I tweeted about this in 2022, as a general trend, and also from the RocksDB meetup emphasizing disaggregated storage:
Replies
Lakebase is referring to the fact that in addition to disaggregated storage s3 is authoritative storage for older data.
Since data is on s3 (or lake) you can perform direct to s3 type operations like data loading, reading this data by engines that are not Postgres and more
I don't think it should be surprising that vendors are not going to lead with "disaggregated storage". I don't see that taking off either. This isn't a paper in a journal. Aurora doesn't call it that either. But yes, it is not a new idea.