Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Extended customizing, SQL functions,

From: pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com
To: "Greg Stark" <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Extended customizing, SQL functions,
Date: 2004-05-29 18:50:13
Message-ID: 16845.24.91.171.78.1085856613.squirrel@mail.mohawksoft.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>
> pgsql(at)mohawksoft(dot)com writes:
>
>> Having internal PostgreSQL variables that are not present on disk, or
>> maybe, variables that are mirrored on disk may be good.
>
> I don't think there's anything wrong with your idea, and there are
> numerous
> good solutions that implement it already. But what makes you think this
> belongs in Postgres?
>
> There are plenty of memory and disk based shared databases that are
> non-transactional and non-relational and meant for storing just this kind
> of
> non-relational data. Some are much faster than postgres for simple
> non-concurrent one-record lookups and updates like this.
>
> Use the right tool for the job. Don't try to make one tool do everything,
> especially something that's anathema to its basic design.

I agree completely with one caveat, when the best tool for the job lacks a
feature what do you do?

>
> --
> greg
>
>
> ---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
> TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command
>     (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to majordomo(at)postgresql(dot)org)
>


In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Christopher BrowneDate: 2004-05-29 18:59:22
Subject: Re: Win32, PITR, nested transactions, tablespaces
Previous:From: Magnus HaganderDate: 2004-05-29 18:45:28
Subject: Re: dynamic_library_path on Win32

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group