Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: [HACKERS] Threads vs Processes

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>
Cc: Claudio Natoli <claudio(dot)natoli(at)memetrics(dot)com>,Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net>,Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org,pgsql-hackers-win32(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Threads vs Processes
Date: 2003-09-25 17:03:02
Message-ID: 18576.1064509382@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackerspgsql-hackers-win32
Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> writes:
> One thing that can be done is to arrange all globals/statics in a
> structure and make that structure thread local.

That's about as far from "non-invasive" as I can imagine :-(

I really, really want to avoid doing anything like the above, because it
would force us to expose to the whole backend many data structures and
state variables that are currently local to individual .c files.  That
complicates understanding and debugging tremendously, not to mention
slowing the edit/compile/debug cycle when you are changing such
structures.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: markwDate: 2003-09-25 17:04:27
Subject: Re: Is this a commit problem?
Previous:From: markwDate: 2003-09-25 17:00:02
Subject: Re: Is this a commit problem?

pgsql-hackers-win32 by date

Next:From: Cyrille ChepelovDate: 2003-09-25 18:22:18
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Threads vs Processes (was: NuSphere and PostgreSQL for
Previous:From: Bruce MomjianDate: 2003-09-25 16:57:09
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Threads vs Processes (was: NuSphere and PostgreSQL for

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group