Re: Postgresql and multithreading

On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 22:20, Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > Let me add one more thing on this "thread". This is one email in a long
> > list of "Oh, gee, you aren't using that wizz-bang new
> > sync/thread/aio/raid/raw feature" discussion where someone shows up and
> > wants to know why. Does anyone know how to address these, efficiently?
>
> Simple: respond to 'em all with a one-line answer: "convince us why we
> should use it". The burden of proof always seems to fall on the wrong
> end in these discussions.
>
> regards, tom lane

That may be easier said that done. If you don't know what the
objections are, it's hard to argue your case. If you do know and
understand the objections, chances are you already know the code very
well and/or have the mailing lists for a very long time. This basically
means, you don't want to hear from anyone unless they are "one" with the
code. That seems and sounds very anti-open source.

After it's all said and done, I think you guys are barking up the wrong
tree. Open Source is all about sharing ideas. Many times I've seen
ideas expressed here that were not exact hits yet help facilitate
discussion, understanding on the topics in general and in some cases may
even spur other ideas or associated code fixes/improvements. When I
first started on this list, I was scolded rather harshly for not asking
all of my questions on the list. Originally, I was told to ask
reasonable questions so that everyone can learn. Now, it seems, that
people don't want to answer questions at all as it's bothering the
developers.

Commonly asked items, such as threading, seems like they are being
addressed rather well without core developer participation. Right now,
I'm not seeing any down sides to what's currently in place. If the core
developers still feel like they are spending more time then they like,
then perhaps those that following the mailing list can step forward a
little more to address general questions and defer when needed. The
topic, such as threading, was previously addressed yet people still
followed up on the topic. Perhaps those that don't want to be bothered
should allow more time for others to address the topic and leave it
alone once it has been addressed. That alone seems like it would be a
huge time saver for the developers and a better use of resources.

Greg