| From: | Arseny Sher <sher-ars(at)ispras(dot)ru> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Arseny Sher <sher-ars(at)yandex(dot)ru>, "pgsql-hackers\(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, pgsql-students(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: [GSoC] Push-based query executor discussion |
| Date: | 2017-03-22 17:04:08 |
| Message-ID: | 87d1d9xmyf.fsf@ispras.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-students |
> While I admire your fearlessness, I think the chances of you being
> able to bring a project of this type to a successful conclusion are
> remote. Here is what I said about this topic previously:
>
> http://postgr.es/m/CA+Tgmoa=kzHJ+TwxyQ+vKu21nk3prkRjSdbhjubN7qvc8UKuGg@mail.gmail.com
Well, as I said, I don't pretend that I will support full functionality:
>> instead, we should decide which part of this work (if any) is
>> going to be done in the course of GSoC. Probably, all TPC-H queries
>> with and without index support is a good initial target, but this
>> needs to be discussed.
I think that successfull completion of this project should be a clear
and justified answer to the question "Is this idea is good enough to
work on merging it into the master?", not the production-ready patches
themselves. Nevertheless, of course project success criterion must be
reasonably formalized -- e.g. implement nodes X with features Y, etc.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-22 17:10:54 | Re: increasing the default WAL segment size |
| Previous Message | Robert Haas | 2017-03-22 17:03:53 | Re: Enabling parallelism for queries coming from SQL or other PL functions |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Oleg Bartunov | 2017-03-22 18:58:44 | Re: [HACKERS] [GSoC] Push-based query executor discussion |
| Previous Message | Arseny Sher | 2017-03-22 16:23:18 | Re: [GSoC] Push-based query executor discussion |