Re: modifying the tbale function
От | Florian G. Pflug |
---|---|
Тема | Re: modifying the tbale function |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 46004CD7.5010609@phlo.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: modifying the tbale function (Tom Lane <tgl@sss.pgh.pa.us>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Tom Lane wrote: > "Florian G. Pflug" <fgp@phlo.org> writes: >> Here is a paper about portable userspace threads that I just googled. >> http://www.gnu.org/software/pth/rse-pmt.ps > > I'm not impressed --- the list of unsolved problems is a bit too long. > One that seems a showstopper for our purposes is lack of ability to > deal reliably with stack overflow on alternate stacks. If we're going > to be doing anything as loosely defined as running a third-party > language interpreter in these stacks, that just won't do. > > Another little problem is it's LGPL. I don't think using that GnuPT library the paper mentions is a viable approach for postgres. I just posted that link because it shows that this is not impossible to do. What would actually be interesting is to find out of the ucontext/getcontext/makecontext/swapcontext/setcontext functions mentioned in the paper are available on the plattform where postgres is used in production for larger dataset. I'd assume that people who need this PL optimization will run a quite update-to-date version of their particular OS, so maybe the portability problems of those functions wouldn't be a problem for postgres - the PL optimization would just be disabled at configure time if they are not available. The main question is: IF the stability problems like stack overflow can be addressed, would this be in principle considered to be feature that people would like to have? Or is it considered not worth the effort? greetings, Florian Pflug
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: