From: | "Simon Windsor" <simon(dot)windsor(at)cornfield(dot)me(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Postgres or Greenplum |
Date: | 2011-06-07 21:26:08 |
Message-ID: | 001501cc2559$858f7470$90ae5d50$@cornfield.me.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi
I have been using Postgres for many years and have recently discover
Greenplum, which appears to be a heavily modify Postgres based, multi node
DB that is VERY fast.
All the tests that I have seen suggest that Greenplum when implemented on a
single server, like Postgres, but with several separate installations can
be many time times faster than Postgres. This is achieved by using multiple
DBs to store the data and using multiple logger and writer processes to
fully use the all the resources of the server.
Has the Postgres development team ever considered using this technique to
split the data into separate sequential files that can be accessed by
multiple writers/reader processes? If so, what was the conclusion?
Finally, thanks for all the good work over the years!
Simon
Simon Windsor
Eml: <mailto:simon(dot)windsor(at)cornfield(dot)org(dot)uk> simon(dot)windsor(at)cornfield(dot)org(dot)uk
Tel: 01454 617689
Mob: 07590 324560
"There is nothing in the world that some man cannot make a little worse and
sell a little cheaper, and he who considers price only is that man's lawful
prey."
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2011-06-07 21:52:09 | Re: Postgres or Greenplum |
Previous Message | Rodrigo Gonzalez | 2011-06-07 18:40:15 | Re: replication problems 9.0 |