On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 8:57 PM, Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com> wrote: > On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 8:53 PM, Hitoshi Harada <umi.tan...@gmail.com> wrote: >> 2010/9/16 Robert Haas <robertmh...@gmail.com>: >>> On Wed, Sep 15, 2010 at 3:00 PM, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>>> Yet there are other cases that probably *could* work well based on a >>>> storage-level abstraction boundary; index-organized tables for instance. >>>> So I think we need to have some realistic idea of what we want to >>>> support and design an API accordingly, not hope that if we don't >>>> know what we want we will somehow manage to pick an API that makes >>>> all things possible. >>> >>> Agreed. Random ideas: index-organized tables... >> >> I'd love to see a table that is based on one of the existing KVSs. > > I'm not familiar with the term KVS?
Oh, key-value store, I bet. Yeah, that would be cool. -- Robert Haas EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com The Enterprise Postgres Company -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
