Re: Hadoop backend? - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From Peter Eisentraut
Subject Re: Hadoop backend?
Date
Msg-id 49A3F150.2040309@gmx.net
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Hadoop backend?  (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>)
List pgsql-hackers
Tom Lane wrote:
> It's interesting to speculate about where we could draw an abstraction
> boundary that would be more useful.  I don't think the MySQL guys got it
> right either...

The supposed smgr abstraction of PostgreSQL, which tells more or less 
how to get a byte to the disk, is quite far away from what MySQL calls a 
storage engine, which has things like open table, scan table, drop table 
on a logical level (meaning open table, not open heap).

To my judgement, neither of these approaches is terribly useful from a 
current, practical point of view.

In any case, in order to solve the "where to abstract" question, you'd 
probably want to have one or two other storage APIs that you seriously 
want to integrate, and then you can analyze how to unify them.


pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: Hans-Jürgen Schönig
Date:
Subject: Re: Hadoop backend?
Next
From: Euler Taveira de Oliveira
Date:
Subject: Re: Adding a field in Path Structure and Plan Structure