On Sun, Aug 30, 2015 at 7:47 AM, Bruce Momjian <br...@momjian.us> wrote: > > I have recently increased my public statements about the idea of adding > horizontal scaling/sharding to Postgres. I wanted to share with hackers > a timeline of how we got here, and where I think we are going in the > short term: > > 2012-2013: As part of writing my scaling talk > (http://momjian.us/main/presentations/overview.html#scaling), studying > Oracle RAC, and talking to users, it became clear that an XC-like > architecture (sharding) was the only architecture that was going to allow > for write scaling. >
I think sharding like architecture is quite useful for certain kind of workloads where users can manage to arrange queries and data layout in an optimized way which I hope users might agree to change if required. One thing to consider here is what kind of scaling are we expecting in such a system and is it sufficient considering we will keep focussed on this architecture for horizontal scalability? Generally speaking, the scaling in such systems is limited by the number of profitable partitions user can create based on data and then cross-partition transactions sucks the performance/scalability in such systems. I understand that there is definitely a benefit in proceeding with sharding like architecture as there are already some PostgreSQL based forks which uses such architecture, so if we follow same way, we can save some effort rather than inventing or following some other architecture, however there is no harm is discussing pros and cons of some other architectures like Oracle RAC, Google F1 or others. With Regards, Amit Kapila. EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
