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

Re: Multithread Query Planner

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>
Cc: Merlin Moncure <mmoncure(at)gmail(dot)com>, Christopher Browne <cbbrowne(at)gmail(dot)com>, Frederico <zepfred(at)gmail(dot)com>, "pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org" <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Multithread Query Planner
Date: 2012-01-24 16:25:59
Message-ID: 6870.1327422359@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I doubt it.  Almost nothing in the backend is thread-safe.  You can't
> acquire a heavyweight lock, a lightweight lock, or a spinlock. You
> can't do anything that might elog() or ereport().  None of those
> things are reentrant.

Not to mention palloc, another extremely fundamental and non-reentrant
subsystem.

Possibly we could work on making all that stuff re-entrant, but it would
be a huge amount of work for a distant and uncertain payoff.

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Robert HaasDate: 2012-01-24 16:29:04
Subject: Re: Multithread Query Planner
Previous:From: Jaime CasanovaDate: 2012-01-24 16:24:08
Subject: Re: Measuring relation free space

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