| From: | "Jonah H(dot) Harris" <jonah(dot)harris(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pi(dot)songs(at)gmail(dot)com, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Subject: | Re: Hadoop backend? |
| Date: | 2009-02-23 23:03:17 |
| Message-ID: | 36e682920902231503t5009cc8co2bc10dd43de784ac@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Sun, Feb 22, 2009 at 3:47 PM, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> wrote:
> In theory, I think you could make postgres work on any type of
> underlying storage you like by writing a second smgr implementation
> that would exist alongside md.c. The fly in the ointment is that
> you'd need a more sophisticated implementation of this line of code,
> from smgropen:
>
> reln->smgr_which = 0; /* we only have md.c at present */
I believe there is more than that which would need to be done nowadays. I
seem to recall that the storage manager abstraction has slowly been
dedicated/optimized for md over the past 6 years or so. It may even be
easier/preferred to write a hadoop specific access method depending on what
you're looking for from hadoop.
--
Jonah H. Harris, Senior DBA
myYearbook.com
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-02-24 00:24:43 | Re: Hadoop backend? |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2009-02-23 21:58:24 | Re: Adding a field in Path Structure and Plan Structure |