| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Seth Grimes <grimes(at)altaplana(dot)com>, pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: PostgreSQL derivatives |
| Date: | 2008-06-09 18:10:19 |
| Message-ID: | 484D720B.1080400@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Whole Thread | Raw Message | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-advocacy |
Jonah,
> Hmm, how did you come to that conclusion? From every definition of
> MPP I can find, GridSQL meets the requirements.
>
> GridSQL:
> - Acts as a single, large-scale system by means of shared-nothing
> clustering (as does Greenplum IIRC)
> - Partitions and executes independent units-of-work in parallel across
> multiple independent microprocessors
> - Is capable of scaling to hundreds (if not thousands) of nodes
>
> What definition are you using, because I can't seem to find it in my top 5?
I was looking at the inability to do unrestricted joins across nodes,
but I realize that there are other MPP systems that have the same
restriction. So I guess that's too fine a restriction.
What's the largest GridSQL cluster anyone's tested, so far? Could we
look at using it for TPC-H?
--Josh
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Josh Berkus | 2008-06-09 18:40:10 | Re: Live CDs for upcoming shows |
| Previous Message | Seth Grimes | 2008-06-09 15:37:06 | Re: PostgreSQL derivatives |