Re: On columnar storage (2)

From: Haribabu Kommi <kommi(dot)haribabu(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: Bert <biertie(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: On columnar storage (2)
Date: 2016-03-03 09:35:13
Message-ID: CAJrrPGfqF_8d7dCq7AstgyBcKOXvnkGw6ivh+eVPLK83jO==Pw@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

On Thu, Mar 3, 2016 at 7:46 PM, Bert <biertie(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
>
> Thank you for the performance test. But please not that the patch is 'thrown
> away', and will be totally rewritten. I have no idea of the status of the
> second / third attempt however.
> However, what is interesting is that for some queries this patch is already
> on par with VCI. Which db is that exactly?

The performance report is taken on the patch that is WIP columnar storage
on PostgreSQL database. Only the storage part of the code is finished.
To test the performance, we used custom plan to generate the plans
where it can use the columnar storage. This way we ran the performance
test.

I want to integrate this patch with syntax proposed by Alvaro for columnar
storage and share it with community, before that i want to share the current
storage design with the community for review by preparing some readme
file. I will try to send this soon.

Regards,
Hari Babu
Fujitsu Australia

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Magnus Hagander 2016-03-03 09:50:03 Re: pl/pgsql exported functions
Previous Message Pavel Stehule 2016-03-03 09:05:06 proposal: psql autocomplete for casting