4 ms·
Sounds like postgres needs to support pluggable storage engines. I am sure Uber (and many others) would have paid some license fee to someone who developed a st
by dumbfounder 10y ago
Sounds like postgres needs to support pluggable storage engines. I am sure Uber (and many others) would have paid some license fee to someone who developed a storage engine that fixed this use case. Think of how much it cost them to switch...
- spotman 10y agoYea would be amazing to see an innodb backend for PG! ( I'll let myself out ;)
- spacehunt 10y agoThere _is_ a Foreign Data Wrapper that wraps MySQL[1]. Not exactly the same thing though, and no idea how well it works. [1] https://github.com/EnterpriseDB/mysql_fdw https://github.com/EnterpriseDB/mysql_fdw
- dumbfounder 10y agoI can tell you it doesn't work very well for wrapping remote postgres tables... it doesn't even send the where clause to the remote server, instead does a table scan across the network and matches locally.
- zejn 10y agoDepends which Postgres version you are using: 9.1 added read only FDW support, 9.3 made it writable, 9.5 also has join pushdown into remote table. Obviously, a lot depends on the FDW extension you are using - it doesn't help if there is support in postgres, if your specific extension does not utilize it.