Re: Postgres as In-Memory Database? - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Stefan Keller
Subject Re: Postgres as In-Memory Database?
Date
Msg-id CAFcOn2_eDN2-BaP3mP_uD6fNrQOQQUk5LX1tcYwbDdqFp6fESw@mail.gmail.com
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: Postgres as In-Memory Database?  (Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>)
List pgsql-general
Hi Florian

Thanks for the remark. I've seen recently somebody from the "core" team (was it at PgCon Rev Meeting [1] or a blog) mentioning it meaning to revive it?

Yours, Stefan




2014-04-07 8:15 GMT+02:00 Florian Weimer <fweimer@redhat.com>:
On 04/02/2014 12:32 AM, Stefan Keller wrote:

It also mentions an insert-only technique: "This approach has been
adopted before in POSTGRES [21] in 1987 and was called "time-travel".
I would be interested what "time-travel" is and if this is still used by
Postgres.

Back in the old days, PostgreSQL never deleted any tuples.  Rows were deleted by writing the deletion time into a column.  As a result, you could go back to old data just by telling PostgreSQL to report rows which where visible at a given time.

Obviously, this approach precluded use of PostgreSQL in many scenarios.  For example, you wouldn't want to use it as your web application session store.

--
Florian Weimer / Red Hat Product Security Team

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Florian Weimer
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres as In-Memory Database?
Next
From: Stefan Keller
Date:
Subject: Re: Postgres as In-Memory Database?