Re: serverless postgresql

> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Jeff Bowden <jlb(at)houseofdistraction(dot)com> writes:
> >
> >>That makes sense to me. I wonder if sqlite suffers for this problem
> >>(e.g. app crashing and corrupting the database).
> >
> > Likely. I can tell you that Ann Harrison once told me she made a decent
> > amount of money as a consultant fixing broken Interbase/Firebird
> > database files. It would be hard to make a living in the same game for
> > Postgres. Now I don't think that Firebird is any buggier than Postgres.
> > But it comes in an embedded-library form; I'll bet lunch that most of
> > those data corruption problems were actually induced by crashes of
> > surrounding applications.
>
> 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?

My impression is that they don't want to go multithreaded. There was some
talk of this for the windows port but I belive that Bruce is simply
modifying the multi-proccess code so that it will work on windows.