Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded

From: Hannu Krosing <hannuk(at)google(dot)com>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded
Date: 2023-06-08 17:07:48
Message-ID: CAMT0RQSVMhk3FVDED8GxrKM35dj3z3Zx6TrSV4cZRTrof3xxdg@mail.gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

I discovered this thread from a Twitter post "PostgreSQL will finally
be rewritten in Rust" :)

On Mon, Jun 5, 2023 at 5:18 PM Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
>
> Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi> writes:
> > I spoke with some folks at PGCon about making PostgreSQL multi-threaded,
> > so that the whole server runs in a single process, with multiple
> > threads. It has been discussed many times in the past, last thread on
> > pgsql-hackers was back in 2017 when Konstantin made some experiments [0].
>
> > I feel that there is now pretty strong consensus that it would be a good
> > thing, more so than before. Lots of work to get there, and lots of
> > details to be hashed out, but no objections to the idea at a high level.
>
> > The purpose of this email is to make that silent consensus explicit. If
> > you have objections to switching from the current multi-process
> > architecture to a single-process, multi-threaded architecture, please
> > speak up.
>
> For the record, I think this will be a disaster. There is far too much
> code that will get broken, largely silently, and much of it is not
> under our control.
>
> regards, tom lane
>
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Dave Cramer 2023-06-08 17:31:32 Re: Named Prepared statement problems and possible solutions
Previous Message Ilya Anfimov 2023-06-08 17:02:46 Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded