Re: Partitioning / Clustering

From: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
To: "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>
Cc: Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Partitioning / Clustering
Date: 2005-05-11 04:39:22
Message-ID: 42818C7A.7020207@samurai.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-performance

Joshua D. Drake wrote:
> Neil Conway wrote:
>> Oh? What's wrong with MySQL's clustering implementation?
>
> Ram only tables :)

Sure, but that hardly makes it not "usable". Considering the price of
RAM these days, having enough RAM to hold the database (distributed over
the entire cluster) is perfectly acceptable for quite a few people.

(Another deficiency is in 4.0, predicates in queries would not be pushed
down to storage nodes -- so you had to stream the *entire* table over
the network, and then apply the WHERE clause at the frontend query node.
That is fixed in 5.0, though.)

-Neil

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-performance by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Josh Berkus 2005-05-11 04:44:06 Re: Partitioning / Clustering
Previous Message Sam Vilain 2005-05-11 04:33:50 Re: Prefetch