Fork me on GitHub
#clojure-europe
<
2020-07-23
>
raymcdermott06:07:12

Although we Aquarians don’t believe in astrology, my chart for this week said I would say hello to a stranger

jasonbell07:07:44

What day is it?

raymcdermott10:07:54

one that is ruled by Jupiter

jasonbell10:07:24

Well I have a 14.28% chance of getting it….. πŸ™‚

jasonbell10:07:35

Even after looking at my calendar.

otfrom11:07:25

@raymcdermott further north that day is ruled by Thor

Ben Hammond12:07:31

why can't these thunder gods all just get along?

πŸ˜‚ 1
borkdude12:07:13

Meanwhile at the other side of the pond: Cognitect joins Nubank. Huh?

otfrom12:07:00

sounds like good money for Cognitect and I'm guessing that NuBank are making sure that they still get the support for Datomic they need

borkdude12:07:21

Maybe JUXT should now join <random other fintech company in the South of Europe> just for the symmetry.

😁 4
otfrom12:07:14

I'd sort of presumed that was the way it was going to go for juxt (or some other big investment from a consortium of banks as I think that crux is at more than one and they don't like paying their competitors to use tech, but will join together to do it)

borkdude12:07:38

so this will make Clojure (and Datomic) more sustainable (financially) in the long run...?

raymcdermott12:07:55

should do ... I can only assume that nubank have much better financial engineering skills than cognitect

raymcdermott12:07:30

also, no more consulting from Cognitect

David Pham12:07:42

but still do Datomic support

David Pham12:07:54

Let's hope for Datomic open source πŸ™‚

2
helios12:07:04

Yeah, i think having a big corporate sponsor like a bank, with deep pockets, is ultimately a good thing. but i wouldn't hate if it remained truly independent (although, who can say what it really means to be independent?)

borkdude13:07:06

Maybe buying Cognitect was cheaper than buying more Datomic licenses πŸ˜‰

πŸ˜‚ 4
agigao15:07:25

Exactly my first thought πŸ˜…

David Pham13:07:41

2300 datomic databases at 5k per databases is a lot haha

thomas13:07:07

why so many DB's? because of microservices?

David Pham13:07:21

we should ask them? maybe they hit the 1B datoms

David Pham13:07:37

afterwards they might not have as much transactors

mpenet13:07:30

they shard heavily I think.

mpenet13:07:57

which makes sense for a bank (at least some parts of it)

otfrom13:07:59

shard by account I presume?

mpenet13:07:29

I imagine group of accounts yes

mpenet13:07:55

you get better perfs all around, less data to carry around, easier maintenance (backups/restore & co) etc etc

mpenet13:07:22

there are quite a lot of advantages to do that. then you loose cross db queries I think (I am not super familiar with datomic)

thomas13:07:31

makes sense I guess

thomas13:07:37

Clojure question though.... anyone here gone Serverless with OpenWhisk?

otfrom13:07:45

you can probably do your controlling function queries separately. I'd do that in a relational database. Don't do analysis on the same DB you do transactions

otfrom13:07:03

you might even want to just store it in S3 and do something like aurora or other straight to s3 storage things

Ben Hammond14:07:53

you can have as many dbs as you like though? pay per transactor instance?

raymcdermott14:07:58

yes, that's correct the license is by transactor not dbs

David Pham15:07:07

I wonder what is the maximum load of a transactor.

Ben Hammond15:07:18

I think you can get that from http://datomic.com

synthomat19:07:39

good morning! Is there an idiomatic way in clojure to manage authorization in web applications? or is this typically done using middlewares?