Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Threads

From: "bbaker(at)priefert(dot)com" <bbaker(at)priefert(dot)com>
To: Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)persistent(dot)co(dot)in>
Cc: PGHackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Threads
Date: 2003-01-03 21:50:48
Message-ID: 3E1605B8.5060403@priefert.com (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
>
>
>I am sure, many of you would like to delete this message before reading, hold 
>on. :-)
>

I'm afraid most posters did not read the message.  Those who replied 
"Why bother?" did not address your challenge:

>I think threads are useful in difference situations namely parallelising 
>blocking conditions and using multiple CPUs.
>  
>
This is indeed one of the few good reasons for threads.  Indeed, 
large/robust systems use a mix.

The consensus of the group is that those who do the work are not ready 
for threads.  Which is fine.  Looking into my crystal ball, I see that 
it will happen, though it appears so far away.

bbaker



In response to

  • Threads at 2003-01-03 15:24:11 from Shridhar Daithankar

Responses

  • Re: Threads at 2003-01-06 06:32:43 from Shridhar Daithankar

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: mlwDate: 2003-01-03 22:26:00
Subject: Re: Threads
Previous:From: Greg CopelandDate: 2003-01-03 21:45:20
Subject: Re: Threads

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group