Re: Postgres Architecture

From: "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Timothy Nelson <wayland(at)wayland(dot)id(dot)au>
Cc: PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)lists(dot)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postgres Architecture
Date: 2023-10-16 15:07:37
Message-ID: CADUqk8VrzFkeAsiZEBnadV2QMXMCJwHgZnMO0LOwdUv79i0xUA@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Mon, Oct 16, 2023 at 6:42 AM Timothy Nelson <wayland(at)wayland(dot)id(dot)au>
wrote:

> I'm expecting that people will pick the idea apart, and wanted to know
> what people think of it.
>

Thanks for the proposal. This is actually a model that's been around for a
very long time. And, in fact, variations of it (e.g. parsing done in one
place and generated plan fragments shipped to remote execution nodes where
the data resides) are already used by things like Postgres-XL. There have
also been a number of academic implementations where parsing is done
locally and raw parse trees are sent to the server as well. While these
things do reduce CPU, there are a number of negative aspects to deal with
that make such an architecture more difficult to manage.

--
Jonah H. Harris

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Steele 2023-10-16 15:15:53 Re: Rename backup_label to recovery_control
Previous Message Robert Haas 2023-10-16 15:06:27 Re: Server crash on RHEL 9/s390x platform against PG16