Support for assets > 25 MiB in KV
Support for assets > 25 MiB in KV
1️⃣ OMG YES I NEED THIS
2️⃣ Neat
3️⃣ I need you to fix something else (please specify)
Poll by beelzabub#0369
15 Replies
Unknown User•2y ago
Message Not Public
Sign In & Join Server To View
If the limit wasn't 25 MiB, then what would it be? Any thoughts on that?
Unknown User•2y ago
Message Not Public
Sign In & Join Server To View
Hmm, most of my use for KV is more with storing web assets and such, maybe 100 MiB?
To me, it seems right now there's a pretty big cliff where you go from KV's 25 MiB Limit to R2's 5 TB, losing KV's benefits.
Unknown User•2y ago
Message Not Public
Sign In & Join Server To View
Hmm, I agree the 25MB limit is sometimes just a bit too small for web assets, although what I'm most sad about is that KV is more like an edge "cache" than a storage solution/database. Being pull-based I find it hard to justify $5/m list/write operations with reading potentially stale data for up to a minute (or longer if explicitly cached, yet still billed for reads). If it were push based, something like quicksilver, I'd give up size - say 8k would be more than enough for some kv-like configuration data storage - we have AE now 
so it would be so perfect for saas's to have config stored in KV, but eventually be pushed to all colos for low latency cold reads.
so it would be so perfect for saas's to have config stored in KV, but eventually be pushed to all colos for low latency cold reads.Unknown User•2y ago
Message Not Public
Sign In & Join Server To View
I have 
Unknown User•2y ago
Message Not Public
Sign In & Join Server To View
*quicksilver, I got the name confused 😅
That would be expensive lol, can't imagine that being cheap at all. Does KV's latency/pull-basedness effect you that much? If you get a enough traffic to get stuff in cache, and it revalidates in the background, should be set.
Unknown User•2y ago
Message Not Public
Sign In & Join Server To View
Again, it doesn't necessarily have to be KV, and it doesn't have to support 25MB values, I'd be happy if keys+metadata were pushed, and the value pulled when read for example
I see. I was curious what exact use case you had that KV wouldn't cover but Quicksilver would, but rereading it again I guess your reasoning is more along not wanting stale data & wanting faster lists and other operations then just simple fetching from a key.
Super interesting that Vitali said it is push+pull though, sounds like it may be somewhat like you are saying. Hopefully we get beta access sometime 
Unknown User•2y ago
Message Not Public
Sign In & Join Server To View