Re: multi-threaded pgbench

From: Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <heikki(dot)linnakangas(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, Itagaki Takahiro <itagaki(dot)takahiro(at)oss(dot)ntt(dot)co(dot)jp>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: multi-threaded pgbench
Date: 2009-07-08 16:57:43
Message-ID: 4A54D007.10709@dunslane.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Andrew Dunstan <andrew(at)dunslane(dot)net> writes:
>
>> I think you should have it use pthreads if available, or Windows threads
>> there, or fork() elsewhere.
>>
>
> Hmm, but how will you communicate stats back from the sub-processes?
> pg_restore doesn't need anything more than a success/failure result
> from its child processes, but I think pgbench will want more.
>
>

My first reaction is to say "use a pipe."

cheers

andtrew

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Chris Browne 2009-07-08 16:59:46 Re: [pgsql-www] commitfest.postgresql.org
Previous Message Chris Browne 2009-07-08 16:55:48 Re: New types for transparent encryption