On Fri, Jun 25, 2010 at 09:44:04AM +0100, Dave Page wrote:
> It could also be argued that having a storage engine API means that
> the query planner/optimiser cannot have nearly as much knowledge
> about how the data is stored and what access characteristics it may
> have thus preventing it from being as well optimised as Postgres.
Having it divided off at the place where it's divided in MySQL is
certainly such a barrier. Having a storage API, as PostgreSQL used to
have, and will have again with SQL/MED, doesn't necessarily present
such a barrier.
Cheers,
David.
--
David Fetter <david@fetter.org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david.fetter@gmail.com
iCal: webcal://www.tripit.com/feed/ical/people/david74/tripit.ics
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
