From: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
---|---|
To: | Samuel Williams <space(dot)ship(dot)traveller(at)gmail(dot)com> |
Cc: | pgsql-general <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: libpq read/write |
Date: | 2019-03-30 14:17:14 |
Message-ID: | 19687.1553955434@sss.pgh.pa.us |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
Samuel Williams <space(dot)ship(dot)traveller(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> I've been doing some profiling and I was surprised to see that libpq uses
> epoll when handling what essentially amounts to blocking reads/writes.
Yup.
> I was just wondering why it needed to be so complicated?
So that we can also support nonblocking behavior (cf PQisBusy).
If the library were being written from scratch today, I doubt anybody
would bother with that; it'd make more sense for an application to
use a separate thread for the database interaction, if there were
other things it needed to pay attention to concurrently. But it is
what it is.
regards, tom lane
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | David Steele | 2019-03-30 15:03:04 | Re: Regarding pgaudit log_directory |
Previous Message | Adrian Klaver | 2019-03-30 13:53:43 | Re: Required postgreSQL 10.4 version for Suse enterprise |