> I am new to postgreSQL. When I read the documents, I find out the Postmaster
> daemon actual spawns a new backend server process to serve a new client
> request. Why not use threads instead? Is that just for a historical reason,
> or some performance/implementation concern?
Both. Not all systems supported by PostgreSQL have a standards-compliant
threading implementation (even more true for the systems PostgreSQL has
supported over the years).
But there are performance and reliability considerations too. A
thread-only server is likely more brittle than a process-per-client
implementation, since all threads share the same address space.
Corruption in one server might more easily propagate to other servers.
The time to start a backend is quite often small compared to the time
required for a complete session, so imho the differences in absolute
speed are not generally significant.
In response to
pgsql-hackers by date
|Next:||From: Don Baccus||Date: 2000-12-04 07:01:44|
|Subject: RE: 8192 BLCKSZ ?]|
|Previous:||From: Don Baccus||Date: 2000-12-04 06:32:47|
|Subject: Re: beta testing version |