> You're almost describing a Teradata DBM.
I knew someone must have thought of it before. ;-)
[snip]
> The thing that impacted me the most about this architecture was that
> sorting was practically built in. So all the intermediary computers had
to
> do was merge the sorted result sets from its lower level computers.
Blazing!
They effectively implemented a binary tree in hardware. One hell of an
indexing mechanism. :-)
> I miss that old beast. But I certainly cannot afford the multimillion
> dollars required to get one for myself.
I suppose it would depend on how many computers you want to have in this
cluster. The main reason why clusters are getting popular recently (albeit
not yet for databases, or so it would seem) is because it is cheaper than
anything else with similar performance.
The main question remains - are there any plans to implement something
similar to this with PostgreSQL? I would volunteer to help with some
coding, if a "group" was formed to work on this "clustering" module.
Regards.
Gordan
