4 ms·
You actually don't need to have the same storage data layout if you use a time series as a starting point; because you can maintain different data layouts in pa
by dustingetz 9y ago
You actually don't need to have the same storage data layout if you use a time series as a starting point; because you can maintain different data layouts in parallel, and the time dimension permits strong consistency across them all.
If this is what you mean by a "database frontend", I am really confused as to why you object to this?
I think this property of time series is going to prove very important in the 2020s
- deleted 9y ago[deleted]
- elvinyung 9y agoAgain, I don't care about distributed consistency here, nor is it mutually exclusive with what I'm talking about. The question we're trying to answer is whether there exists at all a storage engine, at the scope of a single node (obviously generalizable/scalable), that can fit all use cases well. Once you figure out the answer to that, obviously having one storage engine is simpler than having two storage engines.
- dustingetz 9y agoParallel but consistent indexes could be done in a single process too. The tradeoff is natural reads at the cost of extra constant factor of write computation and storage. Which is exactly the tradeoff RDBMS indexes already make.
- elvinyung 9y agoThat's still not what I'm talking about. https://cs.brown.edu/~ugur/fits_all.pdf https://cs.brown.edu/~ugur/fits_all.pdf
- dustingetz 9y agothank you for that link !!