On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 12:41:00PM +1000, Haribabu Kommi wrote: > > On Sat, Jun 23, 2018 at 12:17 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 01:28:58PM -0500, Merlin Moncure wrote: > > On Fri, Jun 22, 2018 at 12:34 PM Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > > > > > What we don't want to do is to add a bunch of sharding-specific code > > > without knowing which workloads it benefits, and how many of our users > > > will actually use sharding. Some projects have it done that, and it > > > didn't end well since they then had a lot of product complexity with > > > little user value. > > > > Key features from my perspective: > > *) fdw in parallel. how do i do it today? ghetto implemented parallel > > queries with asynchronous dblink > > Andres has outlined what needs to be done here: > > https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/ > 20180525033538.6ypfwcqcxce6zkjj%40alap3.anarazel.de > > > Sorry if this was already been discussed in up-thread. > > Just I would like to bring out idea scale out by adding many instances that > can share the lock and buffer pool manager with all the instances with > the help of Remote direct memory access. > > By adding pluggable buffer pool and lock manager, how about adding > many instances and all share the buffers using RDMA to provide > better scaling with shared everything. > > Currently I didn't know have any idea whether is it possible or not and also > the problems in using RDMA. > > Just want to check whether is it worth idea to consider in supporting scale > out?
Yes, Robert Haas did mention this. It might be something we consider much later. -- Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB http://enterprisedb.com + As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. + + Ancient Roman grave inscription +
