From: | Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk> |
---|---|
To: | "Mendola Gaetano" <mendola(at)bigfoot(dot)com> |
Cc: | <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>, Lee Kindness <lkindness(at)csl(dot)co(dot)uk> |
Subject: | thread safety |
Date: | 2003-09-01 17:16:25 |
Message-ID: | 16211.32489.732854.901389@kelvin.csl.co.uk |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-advocacy pgsql-hackers |
Probably because I worked on thread safety and produced a patch. If
someone done the same for PITR and produced a patch i'm sure it would
have generated much more interest. I couldn't have done PITR, so no
loss of resource there.
Was Bruce planning to do the PITR work? If so I guess a lot of his
time's been spent on integrating patches and the like - leaving less
time for other developments.
L.
Mendola Gaetano writes:
> I seen on this list a lot of energy ( also little flames involving SCO
> & Co. ) spent on thread safety;
> was really necessary spent so much energy in this direction?
> I was at Fosdem in Bruxelles ( I spoke there about the use
> of postgres in my project ) and I seen al people there
> was really exicited about the anticipation of Bruce Momjian
> about the PITR in 7.4 but how we know there was no time for it
>
> May be I'm wrong but I'd like know why thread safety was so
> necessary.
>
>
> Regards
> Gaetano Mendola
>
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Jim C. Nasby | 2003-09-01 18:16:13 | Re: Logo for PostgreSQL |
Previous Message | Mendola Gaetano | 2003-09-01 17:06:28 | thread safety |
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2003-09-01 17:17:00 | Re: Preliminary notes about hash index concurrency (long) |
Previous Message | Larry Rosenman | 2003-09-01 17:13:11 | Re: Unixware Patch (Was: Re: Beta2 Tag'd and Bundled ...) |