Re: Postgres as In-Memory Database?

Hi Andrew

You wrote:
> And indeed, given the specifics of the use
> case you're outlining, it's as much a demonstration of that evaluation
> as a repudiation of it.

Maybe my use cases seem to be a special case (to me and over a million
users of OpenStreetMap it's not).
Anyhow: That's why I'm investigating an FDW extension.

> I don't think there's any evidence that the Postgres developers ignore
> useful optimisations. What you're arguing is that the optimisation
> you have in mind isn't covered.

No; my point is that I - and others like Stonebraker, Oracle and SAP etc. -
see room for optimization because assumptions about HW changed. To me, that
should be enough evidence to start thinking about enhancements.

Yours, S.

2013/11/19 Andrew Sullivan <ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca>

> On Tue, Nov 19, 2013 at 02:39:17AM +0100, Stefan Keller wrote:
> > Referring to the application is something you can always say - but
> > shouldn't prevent on enhancing Postgres.
>
> With respect, that sounds like a sideways version of, "You should
> optimise for $usecase". You could be right, but I think the judgement
> of the Postgres developers has generally been that special cases are
> not the mainline case. And indeed, given the specifics of the use
> case you're outlining, it's as much a demonstration of that evaluation
> as a repudiation of it.
>
> I don't think there's any evidence that the Postgres developers ignore
> useful optimisations. What you're arguing is that the optimisation
> you have in mind isn't covered. What you need is an argument that it
> is generally useful. Otherwise, the right thing to do is get a
> specialised tool (which might be a special optimisation of the
> Postgres code).
>
> Best,
>
> A
>
> --
> Andrew Sullivan
> ajs(at)crankycanuck(dot)ca
>
>
> --
> Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org)
> To make changes to your subscription:
> http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
>