From: | Craig James <craig_james(at)emolecules(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Bruce Momjian <bruce(at)momjian(dot)us> |
Cc: | James Mansion <james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com>, pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Multi-threading friendliness (was: libgcc double-free, backend won't die) |
Date: | 2007-12-17 19:35:18 |
Message-ID: | 4766CF76.1010105@emolecules.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Bruce Momjian wrote:
> James Mansion wrote:
>> I think you have your head in the ground, but its your perogative.
>> *You* might not care, but anyone wanting to use thread-aware libraries
>> (and I'm *not* talking about threading in any Postgres code) will
>> certainly value it if they can do so with some stability.
>
> I suggest you find out the cause of your problem and then we can do more
> research. Talking about us changing the Postgres behavior from the
> report of one user who doesn't even have the full details isn't
> productive.
I think you're confusing James Mansion with me (Craig James). I'm the one with the unresolved problem.
James is suggesting, completely independently of whether or not there's a bug in my system, that a thread-friendly option for Postgres would be very useful.
Don't confuse thread-friendly with a threaded implemetation of Postgres itself. These are two separate questions. Thread-friendly involves compile/link options that don't affect the Postgres source code at all.
Craig
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | James Mansion | 2007-12-17 21:05:41 | Re: Multi-threading friendliness |
Previous Message | H. Hall | 2007-12-17 17:53:48 | Re: update 600000 rows |