| From: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)gmail(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Tomas Vondra <tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> |
| Cc: | Heikki Linnakangas <hlinnaka(at)iki(dot)fi>, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Let's make PostgreSQL multi-threaded |
| Date: | 2023-06-07 19:59:16 |
| Message-ID: | CA+hUKGKeJNen_vy=XM8_FKWVzn1p5E+OJ+5Ezc1J-G8dKpkbpg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Thu, Jun 8, 2023 at 7:20 AM Tomas Vondra
<tomas(dot)vondra(at)enterprisedb(dot)com> wrote:
> Is the platform support really there for all platforms we want/intend to
> support? I have no problem believing that for modern Linux/BSD systems,
> but what about the older stuff we currently support.
There is a conversation to be had about whether/when/how to adopt
C11/C17 threads (= same API on Windows and Unix, but sadly two
straggler systems don't have required OS support yet (macOS,
OpenBSD)), but POSIX + NT threads were all worked out in the 90s. We
have last-mover advantage here.
> Also, which other projects did this transition? Is there something we
> could learn from them? Were they restricted to much smaller list of
> platforms?
Apache may be interesting. Wide ecosystem of extensions.
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Melanie Plageman | 2023-06-07 21:16:12 | Re: Wrong results from Parallel Hash Full Join |
| Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2023-06-07 19:48:18 | Named Prepared statement problems and possible solutions |