Re: Proof of concept: standalone backend with full FE/BE protocol
Simon Riggs <simon@2ndquadrant.com>
From: Simon Riggs <simon@2ndQuadrant.com>
To: Amit kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure@gmail.com>, Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>, Gurjeet Singh <singh.gurjeet@gmail.com>, "hlinnaka@iki.fi" <hlinnaka@iki.fi>, "pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org" <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>
Date: 2012-11-13T12:13:12Z
Lists: pgsql-hackers
On 13 November 2012 06:14, Amit kapila <amit.kapila@huawei.com> wrote: >>I get the installability thang, very very much, I just don't see the >>single process thing as the only solution. At very least an open >>minded analysis of the actual problem and ways of solving it is called >>for, not just reach for a close to hand solution. > > Some other usecase where I have seen it required is in telecom billing apps. > In telecom application where this solution works, needs other maintainence connections as well. > Some of the reasons for its use are performance and less maintainence overhead and also their data requirements are > also not so high. > So even if this solution doesn't meet all requirements of single process solution (and neither I think it is written to address all) but can't we think of it as first version and then based on requirements extend it to have other capabilities: > a. to have a mechnism for other background processes (autovacuum, checkpoint, ..). > b. more needs to be thought of.. Why would we spend time trying to put back something that is already there? Why not simply avoid removing it in the first place? -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
Commits
Same data as JSON:
GET /api/v1/messages/:b64id/commits
the thread's linked commits as JSON, with link sources.
API reference →
-
Remove now redundant pgpipe code.
- d2c1740dc275 9.2.0 cited