Celebrating the experimental launch of hubs.neynar.com

Neynar

strong opinion, weakly held: there are always better choices than Replicator

- clients do not need complex joins
- 2 Hubs handle concurrency as well as 1 Postgres constantly drip-fed by Replicator
- tested APIs > rewriting logic in SQL
- backfill is too complex: distinct state layers in Hub, bullmq, redis, postgres

Join my frens in cacc club.

Unforgettable Hair /bcbhshow. FOSS at GH:artlu99.

PFP is a wingding 

I feel I should have dived into the Hub APIs first (slightly steeper idiosyncratic learning curve), rather than jumping straight to SQL: a flat non-idiosyncratic learning curve, followed by more difficult data+infra issues to reason about.

Is anyone thrilled that they chose to base their FC client on Replicator?

likes building things • https://alexgrover.me/links

Do you have an example of the type of join needed by a FC client?

My hypothesis: simple joins can be handled in python/JS/TS without a DB. Neynar has APIs for the more common joins that a client might need. Airstack has APIs for joins that involve off-Hub data.

Any client of even basic complexity will need joins IMO