Re: ice-broker scan thread

From: Mark Kirkwood <markir(at)paradise(dot)net(dot)nz>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au>, Qingqing Zhou <zhouqq(at)cs(dot)toronto(dot)edu>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: ice-broker scan thread
Date: 2005-11-29 04:19:50
Message-ID: 438BD6E6.1000107@paradise.net.nz
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Gavin Sherry <swm(at)linuxworld(dot)com(dot)au> writes:
>
>>I haven't had time to prototype whether we can easily implement async IO
>
>
> Just as with any suggestion to depend on threads, you are going to have
> to show results that border on astounding to have any chance of getting
> this in. Otherwise the portability issues are just going to make it not
> worth the trouble.

Do these ideas require threads in principle? ISTM that there could be
(additional) process(es) waiting to perform pre-fetching or async io,
and we could use the usual IPC machinary to talk between them...

cheers

Mark

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message David Boreham 2005-11-29 04:34:26 Re: ice-broker scan thread
Previous Message Gavin Sherry 2005-11-29 04:14:38 Re: ice-broker scan thread