From: | Alvaro Herrera <alvherre(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | Greg Stark <gsstark(at)mit(dot)edu>, Jaime Casanova <jcasanov(at)systemguards(dot)com(dot)ec>, Greg Smith <greg(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com>, Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us>, Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: thread safety on clients |
Date: | 2009-12-14 14:55:15 |
Message-ID: | 20091214145515.GB4603@alvh.no-ip.org |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> But my recollection of the parallel psql patch discussion is that it was
> rejected because nobody felt comfortable with the API design. Do we
> have any better ideas in that department yet?
It wasn't rejected AFAICT. A finalized API with which there was
(almost?) no dissent was posted by you, after a design/path from Greg
Stark. The problem is that nobody stepped up to implementing that spec.
--
Alvaro Herrera http://www.CommandPrompt.com/
The PostgreSQL Company - Command Prompt, Inc.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-14 14:58:35 | Re: Range types |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2009-12-14 14:51:54 | Re: WAL Info messages |