| From: | Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au> |
|---|---|
| To: | "pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: [HACKERS] backend startup |
| Date: | 2000-02-09 22:32:00 |
| Message-ID: | 38A1EAE0.CB043183@nimrod.itg.telecom.com.au |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Don Baccus wrote:
>
> At 05:50 PM 2/9/00 +1100, Chris Bitmead wrote:
> >
> >Is there any particular reason why a backend has to be started by the
> >postmaster unless it is the only backend running (in debug mode) ?
> >
> >I'm thinking here that
> >
> >(a) It would be more convenient to debug if you didn't have to shut down
> >the postmaster to run gdb postgres and...
> >
> >(b) If that were the case you be part-way to implementing a
> >single-process database option like some databases have.
>
> I can see where (a) is true, but who really cares about (b) any
> more? NT, BSD, or Linux on a several hundred dollar PC has no problem
> with dozens of processes...
Well there is socket overhead and extra context-switching time.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Don Baccus | 2000-02-09 22:51:50 | Re: [HACKERS] backend startup |
| Previous Message | Craig Orsinger | 2000-02-09 22:19:19 | RE: [INTERFACES] The persistance of C functions |