Re: What happens if I create new threads from within a postgresql function?

Sent from my iPad

On 18-Feb-2013, at 22:38, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> wrote:

> On Mon, Feb 18, 2013 at 10:33:26PM +0530, Atri Sharma wrote:
>>>> While your threads are executing, your query can't be cancelled --
>>>> only a hard kill will take the database down. If you're ok with that
>>>> risk, then go for it. If you're not, then I'd thinking about
>>>> sendinging the bytea through a protocol to a threaded processing
>>>> server running outside of the database. More work and slower
>>>> (protocol overhead), but much more robust.
>>>
>>> You can see the approach of not calling any PG-specific routines from
>>> theads here:
>>>
>>> http://wiki.postgresql.org/wiki/Parallel_Query_Execution#Approaches
>>
>>
>> Is there any way to locally synchronise the threads in my code,and
>> send the requests to the PostgreSQL backend one at a time? Like a waiting
>> queue in my code?
>
> Is this from the client code? That is easy from libpq using
> asynchronous queries.
>
>

Actually, I haven't yet faced any such scenario.I was just thinking of all the possibilities that can happen in this case.Hehehe

If we want to do this from a function in PostgreSQL itself, would a local synchronisation mechanism work?

Regards,

Atri