Re: PostgreSQL Timeline
От | damien clochard |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PostgreSQL Timeline |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 525D98EE.5090205@dalibo.info обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL Timeline (Josh Berkus <josh@agliodbs.com>) |
Список | pgsql-advocacy |
Le 11/10/2013 19:33, Josh Berkus a écrit : > >> About Postgres Forest, I never heard of this project before and I >> struglled to find information about it. > > Mostly because it's dead now, and was always Japanese. It was a > predecessor to things like ExtenDB and Continuent. > > However, I put it on my list of forks because I was under the impression > that PostgresForest actually involved forking the backend code of > PostgreSQL. Tatsuo is saying that it didn't, and he would know better > than me. > > On that basis, I personally wouldn't include Forest or pgPool in the > list of forks, because they are tools which go on top of mainstream > PostgreSQL, and if we start listing tools there's no finishing it. > ok it makes sense. I've updated the timeline : https://raw.github.com/daamien/artwork/master/inkscape/PostgreSQL_timeline/timeline_postgresql.png But I can't log to the wiki page right now to update it. > I'm unclear on what the difference between "Business Intelligence" and > "Big Data" forks is. > A degree of magnitude I guess. In mind the software in the BI section can handle several terabytes while the ones in the Big Data section can handle several hundreds of terabytes. But I must admit it's a loose definition :-) I wanted to make a difference between stuff like Yahoo everest and the "more classic" MPP implementations. But of course I can merge everything in a single "Big Data / BI" section and avoid a useless flame war :) With all the latest changes, the whole design needs to be refreshed anyway.
В списке pgsql-advocacy по дате отправления: