From: | Haroldo Stenger <hstenger(at)adinet(dot)com(dot)uy> |
---|---|
To: | Peter Eisentraut <peter_e(at)gmx(dot)net>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server |
Date: | 2002-02-06 22:24:20 |
Message-ID: | 3C61AD14.156DF824@adinet.com.uy |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Peter Eisentraut wrote:
>
> Haroldo Stenger writes:
>
> > Though, starting to think & code thread safe would be nice too.
>
> The thing about thread-safeness is that it's only actually useful when
> you're using threads. Otherwise it wastes everybody's time -- the
> programmer's, the computer's, and the user's.
Yes I see. The scenario under which I see doing it to be useful, is thinking in
adding multi-threading for PG v 7.5 say, and preparing the road. But maybe it's
a worthless effort. Many developers are pointing it. Let's forget about threads
for now.
By the way, my original question about how integrated the multi-threading fork
reached, remained unanswered. I will assume it went threading, dropping forever
the original behaviour, so deciding me towards not considering threading a
viable option (for now).
Regards,
Haroldo.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Haroldo Stenger | 2002-02-06 22:31:34 | Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server |
Previous Message | Marc G. Fournier | 2002-02-06 22:05:35 | Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server |