From: | Stefan Keller <sfkeller(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca> |
Cc: | pgsql-general List <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Postgres as In-Memory Database? |
Date: | 2014-04-07 22:46:37 |
Message-ID: | CAFcOn292PDPdjPA0E_t4Y1nERHRRXzcaCQQVm7yZ2eNJZm8XKw@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Hi Andrew
2014-04-07 23:37 GMT+02:00 Andrew Sullivan wrote:
> (1) this has been discussed many times in the past (...)
Can you point me to one of these discussions?
Actually, I browsed once again the mailing list and this is one of the few
posts I found:
"In-Memory Columnar Store" 9.12.13 by knizhnik.
> (2) nobody seems to be saying, "I have $n to spend on this effort and
> $thesepatches to contribute towards this end along with $thisdesign,"
> but instead to be saying, "It'd be nice if someone else did this work;"
>
Can't see that anybody suggested that. In contrary:
I said, that I'd like to discuss things before I code.
> (3) there _are_ several in-memory-only databases on the
> market, including free-software ones, so it isn't clear what Postgres
> would contribute, especially since its basic design isn't obviously
> amenable to this sort of use.
To me it's unclear why design of Postgres should prevent implementation of
"in-memory tables" e.g. as foreign data wrappers (see e.g. white papers
for SQL Server mentioned before).
Regards,
Stefan
2014-04-07 23:37 GMT+02:00 Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>:
> On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 10:43:58PM +0200, Stefan Keller wrote:
> > running out-of-memory [1][2] - i.e. pretty much what has been discussed
> > here - although little bit reluctantly :-)
>
> It is just possible that some of the reluctance is because (1) this
> has been discussed many times in the past, partly with the arguments
> you've already seen in this thread, and with much the same results;
> (2) nobody seems to be saying, "I have $n to spend on this effort and
> $thesepatches to contribute towards this end along with $thisdesign,"
> but instead to be saying, "It'd be nice if someone else did this
> work;" and (3) there _are_ several in-memory-only databases on the
> market, including free-software ones, so it isn't clear what Postgres
> would contribute, especially since its basic design isn't obviously
> amenable to this sort of use.
>
> Best regards,
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Andrew Sullivan | 2014-04-08 00:06:27 | Re: Postgres as In-Memory Database? |
Previous Message | Michael Paquier | 2014-04-07 22:44:58 | Re: How do you find the row count for all your tables in Postgres? |