Re: What is the practical limitation of no multi-threading?

From: "Robert B(dot) Easter" <reaster(at)comptechnews(dot)com>
To: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Brian Beuning <bbeuning(at)mindspring(dot)com>, pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: What is the practical limitation of no multi-threading?
Date: 2001-12-12 06:07:51
Message-ID: 200112120607.fBC67pH01741@comptechnews.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-general

I see, there is a postmaster -> postgres symlink! In main/main.c it looks at
argv[0] to see how it is being started and calls the right function,
PostmasterMain() or PostgresMain() - everything is linked into postgres. I
never looked before. Next, I should try to understand its IPC, shared memory,
and other multiprocess details. The source comments and code I've seen so far
are very readable. I'll take a look at some of the FAQs too! :-)) thx

Bob

On Tuesday 11 December 2001 09:55 pm, Bruce Momjian wrote:
> > Not being multithreaded may only be a big deal if your application
> > connects and disconnects from the database at high rates. In that
> > situation, such an application would suffer the poorer performance of
> > multiprocess servers like Postgres since it is significantly more time
> > consuming to copy the memory management unit (mmu) state, or at least to
> > load a new program image (the backend), than with threads which share mmu
> > state and program image.
>
> Let me mention that we don't load new executables on backend startup.
> We merely fork() the postmaster. I just checked the FAQ and it seems
> pretty clear. Please let me know if there is additional info I should
> have there.

In response to

Browse pgsql-general by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Arian Prins 2001-12-12 07:23:30 Re: How would i do this?
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-12-12 03:34:54 Re: Inserting the current date