Re: serverless postgresql - Mailing list pgsql-general

From Tom Lane
Subject Re: serverless postgresql
Date
Msg-id 24512.1074201679@sss.pgh.pa.us
Whole thread Raw
In response to Re: serverless postgresql  (David Garamond <lists@zara.6.isreserved.com>)
List pgsql-general
David Garamond <lists@zara.6.isreserved.com> writes:
> Do the developers generally oppose the idea of a threaded (but
> non-embedded) backend as well? If the backend is thread-safe, then users
> can still choose to run multiprocess or multithreaded right?

The backend isn't thread-safe.  There have been repeated discussions
about using threading in the backend (see the pgsql-hackers archives),
but so far no one has made a convincing case for it.

BTW, this whole discussion is getting pretty off-topic for -general;
I'd suggest pursuing it on -hackers.

            regards, tom lane

pgsql-general by date:

Previous
From: Martijn van Oosterhout
Date:
Subject: Re: fixed-length row
Next
From: James M Moe
Date:
Subject: Re: Foreign key question