Architecture
От | Ansley, Michael |
---|---|
Тема | Architecture |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 1BF7C7482189D211B03F00805F8527F70ED109@S-NATH-EXCH2 обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответы |
Re: [HACKERS] Architecture
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
If I understand things right, the postgres process is both a reader and writer. Is this right? If it is, would there be any value in separating the reader and writer portions of the program? This is site specific, but most production environments require far more reading than writing, and this would allow smaller, faster (perhaps) readers to be started, while only opening the writers when necessary. In fact, only one writer could be used, as a daemon possibly, with perhaps slave writers where viable. Also, this would allow administrators to further optimise the operation of the database, and it would be a step closer to a parallel architecture. Imagine being able to run two servers with readers only, and one server with a writer, and auxillary reader, all serving up the same database! By the way, is it possible to run two postgres servers using the same database shared using NFS or SMB or something? Probably not, but why not? I know that a good network comms/signalling library would be needed to do some of this stuff. Would it not be worthwhile to try coaxing one of the open source products (perhaps ACE, I don't know of any others: does it have a C interface) to supporting all the platforms that PG does? Any thoughts.... MikeA
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: