| From: | AMatveev(at)bitec(dot)ru |
|---|---|
| To: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
| Cc: | james(at)mansionfamily(dot)plus(dot)com, Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL Hackers <Pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: One process per session lack of sharing |
| Date: | 2016-07-18 09:25:10 |
| Message-ID: | 754943319.20160718122510@bitec.ru |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
Hi
> The issue here is an architectural mismatch between PostgreSQL and
> the JVM, made worse by the user's very stored-proc-heavy code. Some
> other runtime that's designed to co-operate with a multiprocessing
> environment could well be fine, but the JVM isn't. At least, the Sun/Oracle/OpenJDK JVM isn't.
Actually the lack of threads make any vm quite limit in some aspects of scalability.
The desire to use jvm is the result that there is no desire to
reinvent the wheel.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Andres Freund | 2016-07-18 09:28:34 | Re: Reviewing freeze map code |
| Previous Message | AMatveev | 2016-07-18 09:17:54 | Re: One process per session lack of sharing |