"Serguei Mokhov" <mokhov(at)cs(dot)concordia(dot)ca> writes:
>>> (1) One thread screws up, the whole process dies. In a
>>> multiple process application this is not too much of an issue.
> (1) is an issue only for user-level threads.
Uh, what other kind of thread have you got in mind here?
I suppose the lack-of-cross-thread-protection issue would go away if
our objective was only to use threads for internal parallelism in each
backend instance (ie, you still have one process per connection, but
internally it would use multiple threads to process subqueries in
Of course that gives up the hope of faster connection startup that has
always been touted as a major reason to want Postgres to be threaded...
regards, tom lane
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2003-01-04 01:36:42|
|Subject: Re: Upgrading rant.|
|Previous:||From: Bruce Momjian||Date: 2003-01-04 01:33:47|
|Subject: Re: PostgreSQL Password Cracker|