Re: Postgresql and multithreading

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Greg Copeland <greg(at)copelandconsulting(dot)net>, PostgresSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Postgresql and multithreading
Date: 2002-10-18 15:39:18
Message-ID: 200210181539.g9IFdIO09483@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Tom Lane wrote:
> Greg Copeland <greg(at)copelandconsulting(dot)net> writes:
> > On Thu, 2002-10-17 at 22:20, Tom Lane wrote:
> >> Simple: respond to 'em all with a one-line answer: "convince us why we
> >> should use it". The burden of proof always seems to fall on the wrong
> >> end in these discussions.
>
> > ... Now, it seems, that
> > people don't want to answer questions at all as it's bothering the
> > developers.
>
> Not at all. But rehashing issues that have been talked out repeatedly
> is starting to bug some of us ;-). Perhaps the correct "standard
> answer" is more like "this has been discussed before, please read the
> list archives".

I need to add something to the developers FAQ on this. I will do it
soon.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 359-1001
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road
+ Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Bruce Momjian 2002-10-18 15:48:33 Re: ECPG and bison
Previous Message Michael Meskes 2002-10-18 15:34:17 ECPG and bison