Re: The plan for FDW-based sharding

On Fri, Feb 26, 2016 at 03:30:29PM -0300, Alvaro Herrera wrote:
> That's not the point, though.  I don't think a Postgres clone with a GTM
> solves any particular problem that's not already solved by the existing
> forks.  However, if you have a clone at home and you make a GTM work on
> it, then you take the GTM as a patch and post it for discussion.
> There's no need for hooks for that.  Just make sure your GTM solves the
> problem that it is supposed to solve.
> 
> Excuse me if I've missed the discussion elsewhere -- why does
> PostgresPro have *two* GTMs instead of a single one?

I think the issue is that a GTM that works for a low-latency network
doesn't work well for a high-latency network, so the high-latency GTM
has fewer features and guarantees.

--  Bruce Momjian  <bruce@momjian.us>        http://momjian.us EnterpriseDB
http://enterprisedb.com

+ As you are, so once was I. As I am, so you will be. +
+ Roman grave inscription                             +