So really the only way to find out is dig through discord, or just so happen to see it like I did
So really the only way to find out is dig through discord, or just so happen to see it like I did
Plol
IWell, no. Also in all open alpha and open beta blog posts it's mentioned it's not yet included...
POh really… I didn’t notice it was mentioned as not included
IYeah, it's in there.
IIn the Open Alpha announcement: "The biggest pieces that have been disabled for this alpha release are replication and JavaScript transaction support."
In the Open Beta announcement: "One of the biggest remaining pieces of that vision is global read replication, which we wrote about earlier this year."
In the Open Beta announcement: "One of the biggest remaining pieces of that vision is global read replication, which we wrote about earlier this year."
PYep, I see that now. Thanks
PLuckily I abstracted away the database behind a repo layer… so I can swap it out
PDo you know if reads from a read replica will be charged as well? Or is that kind of “caching out of the box”?
PThat would be awesome
IAs far as I expect, as I haven't had more details than you do, they will be charged normally.
IYou won't be charged more for the read replicas themselves. So no storage nor replications costs.
PSo that’s what they mean… well here’s to hoping reads from it are free as well 
That would be insane for adoption
That would be insane for adoptionII really doubt that... but hey, the Cache API still exists 
PAny really good typescript libs for the cache api?
IThere is the usual
workers-typesI’ll have to find one that is vendor agnostic
PWith an adapter for CF
IThen I've got no clue, unfortunately.
PNo lock-in here!
IDo note that the Cloudflare Cache API implements a subset of the normal Cache API from Service Workers.
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Cache
https://developer.mozilla.org/en-US/docs/Web/API/Cache
I(Ok, technically the CacheStorage part, you need to open the cache...)
IPSomething like this: https://github.com/Xiphe/cachified
I wonder if it’s possible to make a Cloudflare CacheAPI adapter for it…
I wonder if it’s possible to make a Cloudflare CacheAPI adapter for it…
GitHub
wrap virtually everything that can store by key to act as cache with ttl/max-age, stale-while-validate, parallel fetch protection and type-safety support - GitHub - Xiphe/cachified: wrap virtually ...
PI’ve read someone made a Cloudflare KV adapter for it, but Caching API is different right? (And cheaper?)
IIt's free! Not global, though. You can layer multiple levels (as in D1 > KV > Cache API), but not sure it's worth it at some point.
MReads from replicas are the same - we still have to keep a full copy of the database.
MNot free, but keep in mind $5/mo gets you 25 billion rows read: a lot.
Psweet, when can we expect read replicas to be enabled?
MThe Cloudflare Blog
D1 is now in open beta, and the theme is “scale”: with higher per-database storage limits and the ability to create more databases, we’re unlocking the ability for developers to build production-scale applications on D1
Uso what exactly is the spec for
I've got a column defined as
TIMESTAMP columns?I've got a column defined as
created_at TIMESTAMP NOT NULL DEFAULT CURRENT_TIMESTAMP, and that produces values like 2023-10-16 15:56:51, but what actual format is that so I can convert to ISO 8601-1:2019 properly?
Ddate() time() YYYY-MM-DD HH-MM-SS
DInterestingly I just researched this very thing 30 mins ago for my own project. D1 is basically just SQLite so you can see the info in the sqlite documentation https://www.sqlite.org/lang_datefunc.html
Uheh.
except the sqlite documentation sucks and says it is iso8601, when it in fact isn't
except the sqlite documentation sucks and says it is iso8601, when it in fact isn't
DMight be because sqlite.org is refrencing the 8601 Steptember 1997 standarization format while what you need is 2019
DIf you dont mind me asking, why do you need that specific standardization?
Unope its just noncompliant. iso8601 specifically does not allow space as separator, what sqlite actually uses is RFC3339
Ubecause the client consuming the api is C#, and the datetime deserializer wants iso8601-1:2019
DThis does mean that there is an intermediary cloudflare worker used to route the request. Maybe try to standardize it there?
Ask gippity what it knows about ISO 8601 standardization in sqlite, it might give you garbage but garbage is treasure to the right person
Ask gippity what it knows about ISO 8601 standardization in sqlite, it might give you garbage but garbage is treasure to the right person
UThis does mean that there is an intermediary cloudflare worker used to route the request. Maybe try to standardize it there?yeah that is pmuch what I'm trying to do right now
Useems like I could potentially do it on the JS side
U
Ujust gotta tell it that that's zulu time
Dyeah i'd much rather do it while its being routed in JS to reduce redundancy.
Dalso is that a CMD theme or did you take a picture with your iphone 3G and crop it?
Uhmm I wonder whether I could format it in the sql statement directly
Uthat's a terminal theme xD
Dcould you show it to me please
U