From: | "Gustavo Tonini" <gustavotonini(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | "Josh Berkus" <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, "Heikki Linnakangas" <heikki(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
Subject: | Re: Fragmentation project |
Date: | 2007-04-25 20:46:04 |
Message-ID: | 9c31dd0d0704251346w4039af2fp6de82ed6ee667852@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Josh,
On 4/23/07, Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> wrote:
> Gustavo,
>
> > > Oh, you're talking about distributing partitions across different nodes
> > > and parallelizing queries. No, we don't do that today.
> >
> > Yes.This is the goal. Well, I will try it. I'll send the project
> > reports to this list. Comments will be valuable. Desire me good
> > luck...
>
> You might join/look at the PgPoolII project, which is working on parallel
> query amoung other things.
>
The pgpool is an interesting approach to this, but I think that the
funcionality of inserting a record at a backend which will be
"redirectioned" to other and verifying deadlocks under network demands
in acquiring locks on the referenced records/tables in several hosts.
Then, IMO, this may be implemented inside dbms. How Marko wrote, this
is a non-trivial solution...
Really, It could be improved on pgpool to be a process coordinator,
but will need some changes in backend too.
This is a non trivial implementation, but there are several users
waiting for an effective solution for data distributing in a cluster.
These users actually buy commercial solutions or build themselves one.
Gustavo.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Gustavo Tonini | 2007-04-25 20:47:34 | Re: Fragmentation project |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-04-25 20:38:30 | Re: ECPG failure on BF member Vaquita (Windows Vista) |