Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded

From: Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de>
To: Peter Eisentraut <peter(at)eisentraut(dot)org>
Cc: Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded
Date: 2023-06-07 21:48:22
Message-ID: 20230607214822.ga6in2f7762sxnqs@awork3.anarazel.de
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

Hi,

On 2023-06-07 23:39:01 +0200, Peter Eisentraut wrote:
> On 07.06.23 23:30, Andres Freund wrote:
> > Yea, we definitely need the supervisor function in a separate
> > process. Presumably that means we need to split off some of the postmaster
> > responsibilities - e.g. I don't think it'd make sense to handle connection
> > establishment in the supervisor process. I wonder if this is something that
> > could end up being beneficial even in the process world.
>
> Something to think about perhaps ... how would that be different from using
> an existing external supervisor process like systemd or supervisord.

I think that's not really comparable. A postgres internal solution can
maintain resources like shared memory allocations, listening sockets, etc
across crash restarts. With something like systemd that's much harder to make
work well. And then there's the fact that you now need to deal with much more
drastic cross-platform behavioural differences.

Greetings,

Andres Freund

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Daniel Verite 2023-06-07 21:50:57 Re: Order changes in PG16 since ICU introduction
Previous Message Andres Freund 2023-06-07 21:45:02 Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded