Re: Using Threads?
От | Adam Haberlach |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Using Threads? |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20001204151659.A30808@ricochet.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Using Threads? (Bruce Guenter <bruceg@em.ca>) |
Ответы |
Re: Using Threads?
Re: Using Threads? |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 04, 2000 at 02:28:10PM -0600, Bruce Guenter wrote: > On Mon, Nov 27, 2000 at 11:42:24PM -0600, Junfeng Zhang wrote: > > I am new to postgreSQL. When I read the documents, I find out the Postmaster > > daemon actual spawns a new backend server process to serve a new client > > request. Why not use threads instead? Is that just for a historical reason, > > or some performance/implementation concern? > > Once all the questions regarding "why not" have been answered, it would > be good to also ask "why use threads?" Do they simplify the code? Do > they offer significant performance or efficiency gains? What do they > give, other than being buzzword compliant? Typically (on a well-written OS, at least), the spawning of a thread is much cheaper then the creation of a new process (via fork()). Also, since everything in a group of threads (I'll call 'em a team) shares the same address space, there can be some memory overhead savings. -- Adam Haberlach |"California's the big burrito, Texas is the big adam@newsnipple.com | taco ... and following that theme, Florida is http://www.newsnipple.com| the big tamale ... and the only tamale that '88 EX500 | counts any more." -- Dan Rather
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: