Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: > On Wed, Oct 16, 2002 at 01:25:23AM -0400, Bruce Momjian wrote: > > Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: > > > > > ... what I want to know is whether multithreading is likely to get > > > into in postgresql, say somewhere in 8.x, or even in 9.x? > > > > It may be optional some day, most likely for Win32 at first, but we see > > little value to it on most other platforms; of course, we may be wrong. > > In that case, I wonder if it is worth folking a new project to add > threading support to the backend? Of course, keeping in sync with the > original would be lot of work.
Probably not, but you can try. > In that way, one should be able to test the hypothesis (whether threads > improve things, or the other way round - if one likes it it that way :)) > without messing around with stable postgres code, as they did and do > with postgresql-R. I guess. > And a minor question is wheter it is legal to keep the _changes_ in such > a project GPL? We don't think we change the license, and we are happy with BSD. It certainly will never be merged in with a GPL, I can say that for sure. > > I am also not sure if it is a big win on Apache either; I think the > > jury is still out on that one, hence the slow adoption of 2.X, > > As far as we are concened, it is the stability, rather than speed which > still keeps us in 1.3. You could easily lose stability with threads -- don't think they are a free ride --- they aren't, and no, I don't feel like regurgitating what is already a 'thread' link on the TODO list. -- Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us [EMAIL PROTECTED] | (610) 359-1001 + If your life is a hard drive, | 13 Roberts Road + Christ can be your backup. | Newtown Square, Pennsylvania 19073 ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 2: you can get off all lists at once with the unregister command (send "unregister YourEmailAddressHere" to [EMAIL PROTECTED])