On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 08:18:38AM -0700, Joshua Drake wrote:
> On 09/01/2015 02:48 AM, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> >On Tue, Sep 1, 2015 at 09:30:41AM +0530, Pavan Deolasee wrote:
>
> >There is no question that using XC/XL will get us to a usable solution
> >faster, but see my recent post to Josh Berkus --- the additional code
> >will be so burdensome that I doubt it would be accepted. If it was, I
> >bet we would have considered it long ago.
> >
> >I think the only way we are going to get sharding into Postgres is to do
> >it in a way that enhances existing Postgres capabilities.
>
> So that we have XL again?
Kind of. If XC/XL used FDWs I think we would try to use their code
first. The issue is that FDWs didn't exist at the time. I would say
our first approach might be doing XC/XL again with FDWs.
-- Bruce Momjian <bruce@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com
+ Everyone has their own god. +
