Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server
От | nconway@klamath.dyndns.org (Neil Conway) |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20020206193326.GB14564@klamath.dyndns.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Threaded PosgreSQL server ("Marc G. Fournier" <scrappy@hub.org>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Tue, Feb 05, 2002 at 03:36:41PM -0400, Marc G. Fournier wrote: > Tha again, has anyone looked at the apache project? Apache2 has several > "process models" ... prefork being one (like ours), or a 'worker', which > is a prefork/threaded model where you can have n child processes, with m > 'threads' inside of each ... not sure if something like that coul be > retrofit'd into what we have, but ... ? We could even use the nice Apache Portable Runtime, which is a platform-independant layer over threading/networking/shm/etc (there's a summary here: http://apr.apache.org/docs/apr/modules.html). This might improve PostgreSQL on non-UNIX platforms, namely Win32. However, I think using threads is only a good idea if it gets us a substantial performance increase. From what I've seen, that isn't the case; and even if the time to create a connection is a bottleneck, there are other, more conservative ways of improving it (e.g. pre-forking, persistent backends, and IIRC some work Tom Lane was doing to reduce backend startup time). And given the complexity and reduced reliability that threads bring, I think the only advantage would be buzzword-compliance -- which isn't a priority, personally. Cheers, Neil
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: