| From: | "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org> |
|---|---|
| To: | Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au> |
| Cc: | mkscott(at)sacadia(dot)com, mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, Justin Clift <justin(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Haroldo Stenger <hstenger(at)adinet(dot)com(dot)uy>, <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
| Subject: | Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server |
| Date: | 2002-02-08 13:07:54 |
| Message-ID: | 20020208090659.L50941-100000@earth.hub.org |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, 8 Feb 2002, Christopher Kings-Lynne wrote:
> > I can definitely take a stab aat it. Maybe I can make a test case with
> > some globals that are accessed often submit some patches to see what
> > people think. Can I send them to you?
>
> Maybe we should assign someone (or a team) to be the 'thread strike force'.
> Their job is to (at their leisure) tidy up various parts of the source code
> in such a way that they should not affect other parts. This should be done
> during the release cycle, so there is plenty of time to test their changes.
>
> Then, once the whole source tree has had its stylistic improvements, it
> would become easier to switch to a threaded/mpm model...
Woo hoo, he caught up with the thread *grin* *poke*
Yes, this is exactly what we've been discussing, while some have been
trying to tangent off onto side threads ...
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Matthew Kirkwood | 2002-02-08 13:25:59 | Re: Why dump/restore to upgrade? |
| Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-02-08 13:06:40 | Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server |