Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

Better support for remote DBs #920

Open
sinasab opened this issue May 30, 2024 · 1 comment
Open

Better support for remote DBs #920

sinasab opened this issue May 30, 2024 · 1 comment

Comments

@sinasab
Copy link
Contributor

sinasab commented May 30, 2024

Ponder's docs currently recommend deploying on Railway, with the service and backing Postgres DB both living there. This works great, and redeploys of the indexer turn healthy quickly since historical data can be pulled from the cache and any indexing functions can quickly be run against that data. There's super low latency between the service and the DB.

However, if we try to use a DB that's "remote" relative to the service (eg. another Postgres provider, such as AWS, Neon, Fly, etc) the latency to the DB makes the service nearly unusable-- redeploys take significantly longer to respond as healthy. In a sample case for us, even with all historical data cached, re-indexing took over 3 hours.

I understand there are some mid- and long-term fixes on the roadmap; I wanted to open this issue to better track the progress on workarounds and solutions 🫡

@sinasab
Copy link
Contributor Author

sinasab commented May 30, 2024

Quick note: looks like v0.4.15 introduced a nice QoL improvement where restarts of a service don't rerun indexing if none of the config has changed. This could be a workaround in some cases.

Unfortunately, redeploys (not restarts) on railway result in the config changing, since the internal schema config value will update, resulting in re-running the indexing functions.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Labels
None yet
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

1 participant