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

Re: famous multi-process architectures

From: Markus Wanner <markus(at)bluegap(dot)ch>
To: Greg Sabino Mullane <greg(at)turnstep(dot)com>
Cc: pgsql-advocacy(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: famous multi-process architectures
Date: 2008-09-04 16:31:19
Message-ID: (view raw, whole thread or download thread mbox)
Lists: pgsql-advocacy

Greg Sabino Mullane wrote:
> That's a heck of a stretch to say they were "inspired" by
> Postgres. 

Of course! It was supposed to be a marketing phrase. Try prove the 
opposite ;-)

Or in other words: the inspiration certainly didn't come from MySQL.

> A multi-process model is hardly a unique development
> of Postgres, and it's not like we don't still have crash problems:
> "process exited abnormally and possibly corrupted shared memory"
> "terminating connection because of crash of another server process"

Huh? IMO these are good examples of how solid Postgres is: it detects 
the problem, takes appropriate measures and continues to work. Just as 
Google promises for Chrome. That certainly counts as "crash-safety", 
especially for low values of "safety" as used in advertising.

Note that Google explicitly states that their rendering engine or other 
parts of the browser might crash. But everybody is touting Chrome's 
crash safety now...  Obviously it's not about preventing crashes 
completely, but being able to cope with them.

All I'm trying to say is that there might come up a new awareness of the 
advantages of multi-process based designs (as opposed to threaded ones).


Markus Wanner

In response to

pgsql-advocacy by date

Next:From: Chris BrowneDate: 2008-09-04 16:38:19
Subject: Re: Ohio LinuxFest Booth (October 11)
Previous:From: Greg Sabino MullaneDate: 2008-09-04 14:17:14
Subject: Re: famous multi-process architectures

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2017 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group