Re: Horizontal scalability/sharding

From: Petr Jelinek <petr(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Ozgun Erdogan <ozgun(at)citusdata(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, Mason S <masonlists(at)gmail(dot)com>, Oleg Bartunov <obartunov(at)gmail(dot)com>, Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Horizontal scalability/sharding
Date: 2015-09-08 18:40:42
Message-ID: 55EF2BAA.9000707@2ndquadrant.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 2015-09-08 19:52, Robert Haas wrote:
> On Fri, Sep 4, 2015 at 6:52 PM, Ozgun Erdogan <ozgun(at)citusdata(dot)com> wrote:
>>> For Citus, a second part of the question is as FDW writers. We implemented
>> cstore_fdw, json_fdw, and mongo_fdw, and these wrappers don't benefit from
>> even the simple join pushdown that doesn't require Map/Reduce.
>>
>> The PostgreSQL wiki lists 85 foreign data wrappers, and only 18 of these
>> have support for joins:
>> https://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Foreign_data_wrappers
>
> What do you mean by "support for joins"? Do you mean that only 18 of
> the remote data sources can do joins? If so, why does that matter?
> I'd be quite happy if a join pushdown or "distributed shuffle" API had
> as many as 18 users - I'd be quite happy if it had one (postgres_fdw).
> The fact that not all FDWs can support every operation because of
> limitations on the remote side isn't a reason not to support those
> operations when the remote side is capable.
>

Agreed. While I personally don't think FDWs are long term answer for
sharding, I do believe that the infrastructure that is being developed
for FDWs (join/aggregate pushdown) is needed anyway and there are many
common issues that need solving in this area for FDWs, sharding and
parallel query.

--
Petr Jelinek http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Robert Haas 2015-09-08 18:44:06 Re: DBT-3 with SF=20 got failed
Previous Message Andres Freund 2015-09-08 18:35:38 Re: Separating Buffer LWlocks