4 ms·
Maybe to do with amazon implementing postgres compatibility in aurora? Reading this could leave an argument that it's not a "clean-room" implementation and is a
by collegeburner 5y ago
Maybe to do with amazon implementing postgres compatibility in aurora? Reading this could leave an argument that it's not a "clean-room" implementation and is a license violation.
- paulryanrogers 5y agoPg's license is like BSD/MIT. So long as they provide attribution why would they bother trying to do a clean room reimplementation?
- jtc331 5y agoAurora isn’t a reimplementation anyway, it’s a fork with the storage layer replaced.
- dikei 5y agoDepending on the database, changing the storage layer might require changing almost everything: the query planner, optimizer and executioner intrinsically need to know how storage works to make queries efficient.
- jtc331 5y agoAurora most definitely does not do that for Postgres. Postgres’s storage layer is separate enough that this is quite possible. Edit: maybe the confusion here is about what “storage layer” means here. The physical row encoding is still the same. What’s different in Aurora (there are white papers on this) is how the WAL records get applied directly to encoding aware distributed as opposed to separately syncing the heap storage to disk.