| From: | Jonathan Bartlett <johnnyb(at)eskimo(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | David Garamond <lists(at)zara(dot)6(dot)isreserved(dot)com> |
| Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: serverless postgresql |
| Date: | 2004-01-15 15:36:52 |
| Message-ID: | Pine.GSU.4.44.0401150734030.24370-100000@eskimo.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
> Do the developers generally oppose the idea of a threaded (but
> non-embedded) backend as well? If the backend is thread-safe, then users
> can still choose to run multiprocess or multithreaded right?
I've been under the impression that the developers were opposed to a
threaded server because of the complete lack of consistency in threading
behavior across platforms. However, I don't see how doing it as a
multiprocess server as apposed to a multithreaded server affects embedded
use - as long as it can simply be called from a library, why would a user
or developer care?
Jon
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Karsten Hilbert | 2004-01-15 15:44:46 | Re: Using regular expressions in LIKE |
| Previous Message | Francois Suter | 2004-01-15 15:31:13 | Re: Mailing list? was Postgress and MYSQL |