Re: Global Sequences

From: Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>
Cc: PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Global Sequences
Date: 2012-10-16 13:20:54
Message-ID: CA+U5nMJYtHNjcjdVHY9qDFtDZVV-nDc43ciX9Fevsv-oLU5Vvg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On 16 October 2012 13:54, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net> wrote:
> On 10/15/12 5:33 PM, Simon Riggs wrote:
>> There are a few options
>> 1) Manual separation of the value space, so that N1 has 50% of
>> possible values and N2 has 50%. That has problems when we reconfigure
>> the cluster, and requires complex manual reallocation of values. So it
>> starts good but ends badly.
>> 2) Automatic separation of the value space. This could mimic the
>> manual operation, so it does everything for you - but thats just
>> making a bad idea automatic
>> 3) Lazy allocation from the value space. When a node is close to
>> running out of values, it requests a new allocation and coordinates
>> with all nodes to confirm the new allocation is good.
>
> What would the allocation service look like? Is it another PostgreSQL
> server? What's the communication protocol? How would backups work?
> Crash recovery?

I've proposed a plugin for the allocation only. So the allocation
looks like anything you want.

Crash recovery and backups would not need changes.

> Option 4 is of course to use UUIDs.

That is a user level option. If user chooses sequences, then we must
support them.

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

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Simon Riggs 2012-10-16 13:24:12 Re: tuplesort memory usage: grow_memtuples
Previous Message Andres Freund 2012-10-16 13:15:54 Re: Global Sequences