On Oct 27, 2007, at 2:20 PM, Florian Weimer wrote:
* J. Andrew Rogers:

Everything you are looking for is here:


It is the latest Stonebraker et al on massively distributed in-memory
OLTP architectures.

"Ruby-on-Rails compiles into standard JDBC, but hides all the complexity
of that interface. Hence, H-Store plans to move from C++ to
Ruby-on-Rails as our stored procedure language."  This reads a bit

Yeah, that's a bit of a "WTF?". Okay, a giant "WTF?". I could see using Ruby as a stored procedure language, but Ruby-on-Rails seems like an exercise in buzzword compliance. And Ruby is just about the slowest language in its class, which based on the rest of the paper (serializing all transactions, doing all transactions strictly in- memory) means that you would be bottlenecking your database node on the procedural language rather than the usual I/O considerations.

Most of the architectural stuff made a considerable amount of sense, though I had quibbles with bits of it (I think the long history of the design makes some decisions look silly in a world that is now multi-core by default). The Ruby-on-Rails part is obviously fungible. Nonetheless, it is a good starting point for massively distributed in-memory OLTP architectures and makes a good analysis of many aspects of database design from that perspective, or at least I have not really seen anything better. I prefer a slightly more conservative approach that generalizes better in that space than what is suggested personally.


J. Andrew Rogers

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 2: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster

Reply via email to