From: | Chris Browne <cbbrowne(at)acm(dot)org> |
---|---|
To: | pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org |
Subject: | Re: Reasoning behind process instead of thread based |
Date: | 2004-10-29 19:47:22 |
Message-ID: | 60k6t9par9.fsf@dba2.int.libertyrms.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-general |
nd02tsk(at)student(dot)hig(dot)se writes:
>>Two: If a
>> single process in a multi-process application crashes, that process
>> alone dies. The buffer is flushed, and all the other child processes
>> continue happily along. In a multi-threaded environment, when one
>> thread dies, they all die.
>
> So this means that if a single connection thread dies in MySQL, all
> connections die?
Yes, that's right.
> Seems rather serious. I am doubtful that is how they have
> implemented it.
If it's a multithreaded application, then there is nothing to doubt
about the matter. If any thread dies, the whole process croaks, and
there's no choice in the matter. If a thread has been corrupted to
the point of crashing, then the entire process has been corrupted.
--
let name="cbbrowne" and tld="cbbrowne.com" in String.concat "@" [name;tld];;
http://www.ntlug.org/~cbbrowne/linuxxian.html
A VAX is virtually a computer, but not quite.
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Joshua D. Drake | 2004-10-29 20:21:00 | Re: Recommended Procedure for Archiving Table Data |
Previous Message | Chris Browne | 2004-10-29 19:43:10 | Re: The reasoning behind having several features outside of source? |