Re: 9.6 -> 10.0 - Mailing list pgsql-advocacy

From Joshua D. Drake
Subject Re: 9.6 -> 10.0
Date
Msg-id 56F19211.2020804@commandprompt.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: 9.6 -> 10.0  (Thom Brown <thom@linux.com>)
List pgsql-advocacy
On 03/22/2016 11:33 AM, Thom Brown wrote:

>> BDR or PgLogical or Native Partitioning or Federation/Sharding.
>
> The partitioning work is nice, but isn't that really just a way of
> making partitioning easier?

No, we don't at least not completely. Two simple, required problems we
don't solve:

Primary Keys
Foreign Keys

>  We already have partitioning.  We never
> had parallelism.

But we should of, it is an architectural limitation we are fixing one
that is largely transparent and invisible to every user. Partitioning is
a user/dba space thing that people will see and will actively use.

>
> It could be argued we also have sharding with foreign table inheritance.
>
> So really, it's BDR that's being argued as the reason for the big
> jump, but then, what percentage of users will that be a big thing for?

# of users is irrelevant (There are far more people NOT using JSON than
there are that do. Guess what people talk about?)

# of people talking about it is.

Sincerely,

jD



--
Command Prompt, Inc.                  http://the.postgres.company/
                         +1-503-667-4564
PostgreSQL Centered full stack support, consulting and development.
Everyone appreciates your honesty, until you are honest with them.


pgsql-advocacy by date:

Previous
From: Peter Geoghegan
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.6 -> 10.0
Next
From: Robert Haas
Date:
Subject: Re: 9.6 -> 10.0