Re: Roadmap for a Win32 port

From: Thomas Lockhart <thomas(at)fourpalms(dot)org>
To: Dann Corbit <DCorbit(at)connx(dot)com>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, Igor Kovalenko <Igor(dot)Kovalenko(at)motorola(dot)com>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Roadmap for a Win32 port
Date: 2002-06-05 22:21:22
Message-ID: 3CFE8EE2.46020ACC@fourpalms.org
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

...
> Notion:
> Have one version do both. Your server can fork(), and your sever can
> thread. It can fork() and thread, it can fork() or thread.
> That gives the best of all worlds. One client who has his attachments
> to a database all setup might want to do a bunch of similar queries.
> Hence a threaded model is nice.
> A server may be set up to clone the rights of the attaching process for
> security reasons. Then you launch a new server with fork().

Right. If/when that is possible then let's do it, as long as the cost is
not too high. But the intermediate steps are a possibility also, and are
not precluded from discussion.

This will all work out as a *convergence* of interests imho. And there
is no great identifiable benefit for our current crop of platforms for
going to a threaded model *unless* that enables queries for a single
client to execute in parallel (all imho of course ;).

So our convergence of interests for all platforms is in enabling
threading for these two purposes, and focusing on enabling the
multithreaded single client *first* means that the current crop of
clients don't have to accept all negatives while we start on the road to
better support of Win32 machines.

- Thomas

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Jon Franz 2002-06-05 22:50:46 Re: Roadmap for a Win32 port
Previous Message Dann Corbit 2002-06-05 22:09:29 Re: Roadmap for a Win32 port