Re: Threads vs Processes

Tom Lane wrote:
> Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > One solution is for me to continue with this in the Win32 CVS version
> > until I have fork/exec() working on Unix, then test on Win32.  I think
> > that could be done in a few weeks, if not less.
>
> > Another solution, already mentioned, is to use threads and TLS.  This is
> > what SRA's code uses.  I know SRA wants to contribute that code back to
> > the community, so I can ask them to see if they are ready to release it.
>
> If you are willing to expend the effort, I think it would be worth the
> time to pursue both approaches.  We don't yet have enough info to decide
> which one will be cleaner, so we need to push forward on both until we
> can make a realistic comparison.

I think I know enough to get the fork/exec working, particularly because
most of the work can be tested under Unix.  I don't know enough to get
the threads working, and I have had no offers of help since I started.

--
  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us
  pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610) 359-1001
  +  If your life is a hard drive,     |  13 Roberts Road
  +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073