Re: The plan for FDW-based sharding - Mailing list pgsql-hackers

 

I don't expect many other TM developers, so there is no problem with improving API. We started from practical needs and analyses of many academical papers. We spent a year to play with several prototypes to prove our proposed API (expect more in several months). Everybody could download them a test. Wish we can do that with FDW-based sharding solution.

Of course, we can fork postgres as XC/XL people did and certainly eventually will do, if community don't accept our proposal, since it's very difficult to work on cross-releases projects. But then there are will be no winners, so why do we all are aggressively don't understand each other ! I was watching  XC/XL for years and thought I don't want to go this way of isolation from the community, so we decided to let TM pluggable to stay with community and let everybody prove their concepts. if you have ideas how to improve TM API, we are open, if you know it's broken by design, let's help us to fix it.  I have my understanding about FDW, but I deliberately don't participate in some very hot discussion, just because I feel myself not commited to work on. Your group is very enthusiastic on FDW, it's ok until you improve FDW in general way, I'm very happy on current work.  I prefer you show prototype of sharding solution, which convince us in functionality and perfromance. I agree with Thomas Vondra, that we don't want to wait for years to see the result, we want to expect results, based on prototype, which should be done between releases. If you don't have enough resources for this, let's do together with community.  Nobody as I've seen are against FDW sharding, people complained about "the only sharding solution" in postgres, without proving so.