Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded

From: Kyotaro Horiguchi <horikyota(dot)ntt(at)gmail(dot)com>
To: knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru
Cc: pashkin(dot)elfe(at)gmail(dot)com, dilipbalaut(at)gmail(dot)com, hannuk(at)google(dot)com, hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded
Date: 2023-06-14 07:01:33
Message-ID: 20230614.160133.1540361929672513850.horikyota.ntt@gmail.com
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

At Wed, 14 Jun 2023 08:46:05 +0300, Konstantin Knizhnik <knizhnik(at)garret(dot)ru> wrote in
> But I do not think that it is somehow related with using threads
> instead of process.
> The question whether to use private or shared cache is not directly
> related to threads vs. process choice.

Yeah, I unconsciously conflated the two things. We can use per-thread
cache on multithreading.

> Yes, threads makes implementation of shared cache much easier. But it
> can be also done using dynamic
> memory segments, Definitely shared cache has its pros and cons, first
> if all it requires sycnhronization
> which may have negative impact o performance.

True.

> I have made an attempt to combine both caches: use relatively small
> per-backend local cache
> and large shared cache.
> I wonder what people think about the idea to make backends less thick
> by using shared cache.

I remember of a relatively old thread about that.

https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4E72940DA2BF16479384A86D54D0988A567B9245%40G01JPEXMBKW04

regards.

--
Kyotaro Horiguchi
NTT Open Source Software Center

In response to

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Andreas Karlsson 2023-06-14 07:06:05 Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded
Previous Message Richard Guo 2023-06-14 06:55:36 Re: ERROR: wrong varnullingrels (b 3) (expected (b)) for Var 2/1