| From: | Simon Riggs <simon(at)2ndQuadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Cc: | MIchael <michael(dot)paquier(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, "Fred&Dani&Pandora&Aquiles" <fred(at)nti(dot)ufop(dot)br>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Parallell Optimizer |
| Date: | 2013-06-13 08:17:57 |
| Message-ID: | CA+U5nMJdb6m6yStWx-RM1nqeeyi-tbzXosoi2rp-1m8kaVvkvA@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 11 June 2013 15:59, Tatsuo Ishii <ishii(at)postgresql(dot)org> wrote:
> I wonder why "true" synchronous replication nor "eager replication"
> are not in the developer TODO list. If we want them in the future,
> they should be on it.
I think you still need to explain what "true" synchronous replication is.
IMHO eager replication is of value only in a very localised sense. It
doesn't help the general case where the location of servers isn't
known or is known to be distributed, since it causes huge performance
drops in those cases.
Given sufficient resources (time, money, skill), it would certainly be
on the list somewhere. But at present its far enough down the list to
not be actively worked on, speaking personally. Please don't read into
that some form of opposition.
--
Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Simon Riggs | 2013-06-13 08:24:31 | Re: Parallell Optimizer |
| Previous Message | Dean Rasheed | 2013-06-13 06:59:05 | Re: [9.3] Automatically updatable views vs writable foreign tables |