From: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> |
Cc: | "Jim C(dot) Nasby" <decibel(at)decibel(dot)org>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: Async commands (like drop index) |
Date: | 2007-05-18 17:15:47 |
Message-ID: | 464DDF43.7020209@commandprompt.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote:
> "Joshua D. Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com> writes:
>> Yes. As cool as concurrent psql is... the majority of our users don't
>> use it. They use PgAdminIII.
>
> So? IIRC pgAdmin can open up multiple connections already.
>
>> This should be client agnostic imo.
>
> Just to be perfectly clear: the odds of making a single backend support
> concurrent operations in the foreseeable future are indistinguishable
> from zero. So if you want a behavior like this, it's going to have to
> happen by making the client open up multiple connections. I see no
> reason at all to tie such a feature to index-dropping in particular.
I was just using the index dropping as something particularly useful. It
could be anything.
Also note that I really wasn't trying to detract from what's important
right now. I just wanted to get this on the list for later discussion.
Joshua D. Drake
>
> regards, tom lane
>
--
=== The PostgreSQL Company: Command Prompt, Inc. ===
Sales/Support: +1.503.667.4564 || 24x7/Emergency: +1.800.492.2240
Providing the most comprehensive PostgreSQL solutions since 1997
http://www.commandprompt.com/
Donate to the PostgreSQL Project: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
PostgreSQL Replication: http://www.commandprompt.com/products/
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Neil Conway | 2007-05-18 17:20:41 | Re: Async commands (like drop index) |
Previous Message | Tom Lane | 2007-05-18 17:12:57 | Re: Async commands (like drop index) |