Re: I'd like to discuss scaleout at PGCon - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

From MauMau
Subject Re: I'd like to discuss scaleout at PGCon
Date
Msg-id ACCD2FA21E9745C9956A76E0F8D03EAE@tunaPC
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: I'd like to discuss scaleout at PGCon  (Ashutosh Bapat <ashutosh.bapat@enterprisedb.com>)
List pgsql-hackers
From: Ashutosh Bapat
> Each node need to be confiugred and maintained. That requires
efforts.
> So we need to keep the number of nodes to a minimum. With a
> coordinator and worker node segregation, we require at least two
nodes
> in a cluster and just that configuration doesn't provide much
> scalability. With each node functioning as coordinator (facing
> clients) and worker (facing other coordinators) keeps the number of
> nodes to a minimum. It is good for HA.

I think so, too.  Every node should behave as both the coordinator and
the data node in XL parlance.  But I don't preclude a central node.
Some node needs to manage sequences, and it may as well manage the
system catalog.


Regards
MauMau



pgsql-hackers by date:

Previous
From: "MauMau"
Date:
Subject: Re: I'd like to discuss scaleout at PGCon
Next
From: David Fetter
Date:
Subject: Re: Spilling hashed SetOps and aggregates to disk