thread safety

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
>

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-advocacy by date

  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

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  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 ...)