Re: [HACKERS] Threads

From: Thomas Lockhart <lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu>
To: Duane Currie <dcurrie(at)sandman(dot)acadiau(dot)ca>
Cc: pgsql-hackers(at)postgreSQL(dot)org
Subject: Re: [HACKERS] Threads
Date: 1999-08-03 14:18:07
Message-ID: 37A6FA1F.DF2CC054@alumni.caltech.edu
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> As well, a few have been asking about multi-threading.
> Any thoughts?

Threads within a client backend might be interesting. imho a
single-process multi-client multi-threaded server is just asking for
trouble, putting all clients at risk for any single misbehaving one.
Particularly with our extensibility features, where users and admins
can add functionality through code they have written (or are trying to
write ;) having each backend isolated is A Good Thing.

istm that many of the cases for which multi-threading is proposed (web
serving always comes up) can be solved using persistant connections or
other techniques.

- Thomas

--
Thomas Lockhart lockhart(at)alumni(dot)caltech(dot)edu
South Pasadena, California

In response to

  • Threads at 1999-08-03 10:56:51 from Duane Currie

Responses

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Thomas Lockhart 1999-08-03 14:21:50 Re: [HACKERS] || PostgreSQL
Previous Message Tom Lane 1999-08-03 14:03:47 Re: [HACKERS] pg_upgrade may be mortally wounded