* Manish Rai Jain <manishrjain@gmail.com> [25/05/11 22:06]:
> Hi hackers,
> 1. Does this direction make sense for experimentation within the Postgres
> ecosystem?
> 2. Are there known architectural blockers or prior discussions/attempts in
> this space worth revisiting?
> 3. Would such a project be best developed entirely as a fork, or is there
> openness to evolving TAM to better support pluggable storage with LSM‑like
> semantics?
I think it would be difficult to fully integrate rocksdb since it
has its own transaction control and recovery, as well as uses
multi-threading rather than multi-processing.
PostgreSQL TAM expects that PostgreSQL WAL is used for replication
and most of transaction control functions (e.g. locking) is
outside the TAM domain.
--
Konstantin Osipov, Moscow, Russia