From: | postgre(at)seznam(dot)cz |
---|---|
To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> |
Cc: | Andreas Kretschmer <akretschmer(at)spamfence(dot)net>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: [GENERAL] Re: [GENERAL] postgreSQL multithreading |
Date: | 2008-03-30 18:47:55 |
Message-ID: | 1268.1745-26857-2126107315-1206902875@seznam.cz |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Craig Ringer <craig(at)postnewspapers(dot)com(dot)au> wrote:
> Past discussion here suggests that the backends are strictly single
> threaded. While you might be able to use multiple threads - I don't know
> - I expect you'd need to protect all SPI access by a lock that
> serialized everything anyway.
>
> Doing it externally with a script / program that uses multiple
> connections might just be the way. Unfortunately that means that you
> don't get a single consistent snapshot - each connection will have its
> own, potentially different, view of the database state.
>
> A possible use for read only transactions being able to share a snapshot
> came up in discussion a few weeks ago. I guess this is another one.
>
> --
> Craig Ringer
I fill tables with observation data, so the tables don't change except the
one for current day. So I don't need to care about different states
of database.
From what has been posted I think that C function can do the work for me.
But I would still appreciate some peace of code from which I can figure
out how this can be done, because I'm new to database programing.
Thank you
Lukas Houf
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ross Boylan | 2008-03-30 18:54:38 | Re: database 1.2G, pg_dump 73M?! |
Previous Message | Naz Gassiep | 2008-03-30 18:37:26 | Re: Locale / Encoding mismatch |