On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 12:06:43PM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> On 08/29/2016 11:46 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> > On Mon, Aug 29, 2016 at 11:41:48AM -0700, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >> On 08/29/2016 11:39 AM, David Fetter wrote:
> >>> On Fri, Aug 26, 2016 at 08:41:15PM -0400, Josh Berkus wrote:
> >>>> I suspect not, but I can't think of another example right now.
> >>>
> >>> There are a fair number that beat us to that punch (GPDB, HadoopDB,
> >>> etc.)
> >>
> >> Do they have parallel query on a single node? I suppose you can have
> >> multiple shards-per-node, but that's still a different feature.
> >
> > I don't know of one offhand, but that distinction seems like a *VERY*
> > thin slice to be claiming.
>
> Yeah, it's certainly not terribly marketable. "First non-sharded
> parallel query".
PostgreSQL: we don't charge you a network hop to use another core ;)
Best,
David.
--
David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/
Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter
Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com
Remember to vote!
Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
