On Mon, Apr 07, 2014 at 10:43:58PM +0200, Stefan Keller wrote: > running out-of-memory [1][2] - i.e. pretty much what has been discussed > here - although little bit reluctantly :-) It is just possible that some of the reluctance is because (1) this has been discussed many times in the past, partly with the arguments you've already seen in this thread, and with much the same results; (2) nobody seems to be saying, "I have $n to spend on this effort and $thesepatches to contribute towards this end along with $thisdesign," but instead to be saying, "It'd be nice if someone else did this work;" and (3) there _are_ several in-memory-only databases on the market, including free-software ones, so it isn't clear what Postgres would contribute, especially since its basic design isn't obviously amenable to this sort of use. Best regards, A -- Andrew Sullivan ajs@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx -- Sent via pgsql-general mailing list (pgsql-general@xxxxxxxxxxxxxx) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-general
