Re: patch: SQL/MED(FDW) DDL - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: patch: SQL/MED(FDW) DDL
Date
Msg-id 29640.1284602700@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: patch: SQL/MED(FDW) DDL  (Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz>)
Responses Re: patch: SQL/MED(FDW) DDL
List pgsql-hackers
Mark Kirkwood <mark.kirkwood@catalyst.net.nz> writes:
> On 16/09/10 13:22, Tom Lane wrote:
>> What exactly do those get you that an ordinary index, or at worst an
>> index-organized table, doesn't get you?

> It is pretty rare to see key value stores vs relational engines 
> discussed without a descent into total foolishiness, but this Wikipedia 
> page looks like a reasonable summary:
> http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NoSQL

That doesn't do anything at all to answer my question.  I don't want
to debate NoSQL versus traditional RDBMS here.  What I asked was:
given that PG is a traditional RDBMS, what exactly are you hoping
to accomplish by putting a key-value storage mechanism in it?  And
if you did, how would that be different from an index-organized table?
        regards, tom lane


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Itagaki Takahiro
Date:
Subject: Re: Basic JSON support
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: patch: SQL/MED(FDW) DDL