Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server

From: <mkscott(at)sacadia(dot)com>
To: "Marc G(dot) Fournier" <scrappy(at)hub(dot)org>
Cc: Haroldo Stenger <hstenger(at)adinet(dot)com(dot)uy>, Brian Bruns <camber(at)ais(dot)org>, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server
Date: 2002-02-07 16:13:02
Message-ID: Pine.GSO.4.10.10202070801440.2959-100000@goldengate.kojoworldwide.com.
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> Again, if we go at it as 'threaded for v7.3', then most probably ... but I
> would not allow that to happen, nor would any of the *core* developers ...
> what I am, and have been, advocating is starting down the 'thread-safe'
> path ... as has actually been discussed before, there are sections of
> PostgreSQL that could make use of threading without the whole system
> *being* threaded ... stuff that, right now, are done sequentially that
> could be done in parralel if threading was available ...

How about doing what Marc suggests and start moving toward reentrant
functions in postgres.

This could be done by creating a global private
memory area that is accessed much like shared memory is now with a hash
table setting aside memory for various code subsections. We could put
all the global variables there with little impact on current functionality
and, if done right, speed. I think I have a good idea as to where most of
the "difficult" globals are and could start working on moving them once
the global memory area was set up. We can worry about threads vs.
processes later.

comments?

Myron

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Peter Eisentraut 2002-02-07 16:43:42 Re: Suggestions for 7.3 date handling
Previous Message Tom Lane 2002-02-07 16:12:48 Re: Suggestions for 7.3 date handling