| From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
|---|---|
| To: | Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> |
| Cc: | 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 |
| Subject: | Re: [pgsql-www] NuSphere and PostgreSQL for windows |
| Date: | 2003-09-25 14:01:50 |
| Message-ID: | 2683.1064498510@sss.pgh.pa.us |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers pgsql-www |
Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in> writes:
> Considering this could be a configure time option, you mean to say
> that even on Unix we could get threaded postgresql which would not
> require any shared buffers but instead operate upon local shared
> buffers only?
Only if we were prepared to support multiple, no doubt incompatible
threading libraries, which is exactly what I wasn't volunteering us for.
> I am sure local buffers would be lot cheaper than shared buffers.
On what do you base that? It sounds like pure fantasy to me. RAM is RAM.
regards, tom lane
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-25 14:07:39 | Re: NuSphere and PostgreSQL for windows |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-09-25 13:58:31 | Re: [pgsql-www] NuSphere and PostgreSQL for windows |
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-25 14:07:39 | Re: NuSphere and PostgreSQL for windows |
| Previous Message | Andrew Dunstan | 2003-09-25 13:58:31 | Re: [pgsql-www] NuSphere and PostgreSQL for windows |