Re: Shared memory
От | Thomas Hallgren |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Shared memory |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 44282A68.7030208@tada.se обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Shared memory (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > Thomas Hallgren <thomas@tada.se> writes: > >> Tom Lane wrote: >> >>> It's only that much difference? Given all the other advantages of >>> separating the JVM from the backends, I'd say you should gladly pay >>> that price. >>> >>> >> If I'm right, and the most common scenario is clients using connection pools, then it's very >> likely that you don't get any advantages at all. Paying for nothing with a 440% increase in >> calling time (at best) seems expensive :-) >> > > You are focused too narrowly on a few performance numbers. In my mind > the primary advantage is that it will *work*. I do not actually believe > that you'll ever get the embedded-JVM approach to production-grade > reliability, because of the fundamental problems with threading, error > processing, etc. > My focus with PL/Java over the last year has been to make it a production-grade product and I think I've succeeded pretty well. The current list of open bugs is second to none. What fundamental problems are you thinking of that hasn't been solved already? Regards, Thomas Hallgren
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: