"Dave Page" <dpage@postgresql.org> writes:
> Alban Hertroys wrote:
>> So actually the remark shouldn't be that "the multi-threaded
>> architecture is only advantageous on Windows", but more like "the
>> multi-process architecture is disadvantageous on Windows and hence a
>> multi-threaded architecture is preferred (on that particular OS)".
>
> Yeah - but I'm not sure thats necessarily something that should have a place on
> a bullet point comparison.
Note that while we use the OS's "threads" api we're not really any more
multi-threaded on Windows than we are on Unix. We don't use any shared memory
data structures we don't on Unix using SysV shared memory, we don't use any
mutexes or other threaded programming techniques that we don't use on Unix,
and so on.
It's purely a question of which API we use to create the threads of execution.
Not an architectural change in Postgres.
--
Gregory Stark
EnterpriseDB http://www.enterprisedb.com
