Not quite. The performance gain is to bring those features to Postgres!

Edit:

Performance gains are from having the ability to load balance reads (horizontal scaling for read queries) and scale out writes (with sharding). Once instance bottleneck in Postgres has many faces:

1. Behind schedule vacuums because of too many dead tuples (too many writes)

2. The WALWriter is single-threaded and IO-bound - Postgres can only do about 200-300MB/sec in writes per instance (real prod numbers on EC2 with NVMes and ZFS, basically best case scenario).

3. Bulkheading: single primary is a single point of failure. With 12 primaries, if one fails, 91% of your customers don't notice.

The list goes on. Rust is just a side effect. We love it because it's fast and correct - the perfect match for a database product.

▲

hylaride 5 hours ago | parent | next [-]

So to oversimplify, is the idea to bring an AWS Aurora-style storage mechanism natively to Postgres?

▲

levkk 4 hours ago | parent [-]

Yes, except it doesn't have any cross-dependencies on the same volume, so the uptime here should be higher.

▲

jeremyjh 3 hours ago | parent [-]

Aurora has a completely different storage backend. PgDog is a front end proxy - each server in the cluster is still using standard Postgres right?

	▲	levkk 3 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Yup!

▲

VeninVidiaVicii 6 hours ago | parent | prev [-]

Oh thanks for clearing that up.

	▲	levkk 6 hours ago \| parent [-]
		Sorry, out walking the dog (not a pun). I'll post more details in a few.