Re: Postgres or Greenplum - Mailing list pgsql-general
From | Radosław Smogura |
---|---|
Subject | Re: Postgres or Greenplum |
Date | |
Msg-id | f059c15b5b583a4e7a7142a632d23de4@mail.softperience.eu Whole thread Raw |
In response to | Re: Postgres or Greenplum (Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>) |
Responses |
Re: Postgres or Greenplum
Re: Postgres or Greenplum |
List | pgsql-general |
On Tue, 7 Jun 2011 23:04:04 +0100, Simon Riggs wrote: > On Tue, Jun 7, 2011 at 10:26 PM, Simon Windsor > <simon.windsor@cornfield.me.uk> wrote: > >> I have been using Postgres for many years and have recently discover >> Greenplum, which appears to be a heavily modify Postgres based, >> multi node >> DB that is VERY fast. >> >> All the tests that I have seen suggest that Greenplum when >> implemented on a >> single server, like Postgres, but with several separate >> installations can >> be many time times faster than Postgres. This is achieved by using >> multiple >> DBs to store the data and using multiple logger and writer >> processes to >> fully use the all the resources of the server. >> >> Has the Postgres development team ever considered using this >> technique to >> split the data into separate sequential files that can be accessed >> by >> multiple writers/reader processes? If so, what was the conclusion? >> >> Finally, thanks for all the good work over the years! > > Yes, I've looked at implementing parallel query a number of times. My > estimate was that its about 2 man years effort to do something > worthwhile there, and so far nobody has offered funding for such a > task. There was some recent discussion about obtaining funding > recently, so we'll see how that goes. It is of course reasonably > straightforward to achieve trivial parallelism, but that's mostly > useless in the real world. So its on the roadmap, but some way off > yet. > > Many commercial implementations exist, and IMHO the Greenplum > solution > is the best general purpose DW solution currently available for > PostgreSQL-like environments. Greenplum does have a community edition > that is free to use and your stated performance results match my > experience. We've worked with a number of data warehouse customers > hitting the limits and moving up to Greenplum. Once people give up > the > Oracle mantra, it frees them to consider a range of alternatives. > > Main reasons for deferring work on parallel query has been that other > techniques have been easier to achieve useful gains with. For > example, > partitioning allowed PostgreSQL to dramatically reduce scan times > with > less complexity. Synchronous scans can also achieve good efficiencies > for cases where total throughput is important. I expect to do more > work on improving decision support query performance in the next > release (9.2), so if anybody wishes to partially fund development > that > would be much appreciated. > > -- > Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ > PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services But, I think GreenPlum is "share nothing", isn't it? Regards, Radek
pgsql-general by date: