| From: | Craig Ringer <craig(at)2ndquadrant(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> |
| Cc: | Thomas Munro <thomas(dot)munro(at)enterprisedb(dot)com>, Konstantin Knizhnik <k(dot)knizhnik(at)postgrespro(dot)ru>, PostgreSQL Hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: Postgres with pthread |
| Date: | 2017-12-08 01:14:23 |
| Message-ID: | CAMsr+YHiVg9wbWK1Vd89aK8UhoRJBtXKbce2TikSWpi3CEzgjg@mail.gmail.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On 8 December 2017 at 03:58, Andres Freund <andres(at)anarazel(dot)de> wrote:
> On 2017-12-07 11:26:07 +0800, Craig Ringer wrote:
> > PostgreSQL's architecture conflates "connection", "session" and
> "executor"
> > into one somewhat muddled mess.
>
> How is the executor entangled in the other two?
>
>
Executor in the postgres sense isn't, so I chose the word poorly.
"Engine of execution" maybe. What I'm getting at is that we tie up more
resources than should ideally be necessary when a session is idle,
especially idle in transaction. But I guess a lot of that is really down to
memory allocated and not returned to the OS (because like other C programs
we can't do that), etc. The key resources like PGXACT entries aren't
something we can release while idle in a transaction after all.
--
Craig Ringer http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/
PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Thomas Munro | 2017-12-08 01:23:19 | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |
| Previous Message | Peter Geoghegan | 2017-12-08 00:57:26 | Re: [HACKERS] Parallel tuplesort (for parallel B-Tree index creation) |