http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html

From pgsql-hackers-owner+M16320=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org Thu Dec 6 10:16:20 2001

Return-path: <pgsql-hackers-owner+M16320=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org>

Received: from west.navpoint.com (west.navpoint.com [207.106.42.13])

by candle.pha.pa.us (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fB6FGJZ29347

for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:16:19 -0500 (EST)

Received: from rs.postgresql.org (server1.pgsql.org [64.39.15.238] (may be forged))

by west.navpoint.com (8.11.6/8.10.1) with ESMTP id fB6FGIE25797

for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 10:16:18 -0500 (EST)

Received: from postgresql.org (postgresql.org [64.49.215.8])

by rs.postgresql.org (8.11.6/8.11.6) with ESMTP id fB6F8MR55154

for <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>; Thu, 6 Dec 2001 09:12:12 -0600 (CST)

(envelope-from pgsql-hackers-owner+M16320=candle.pha.pa.us=pgman@postgresql.org)

Received: from dendrite.sacadia.com (adsl-64-168-22-137.dsl.snfc21.pacbell.net [64.168.22.137])

by postgresql.org (8.11.3/8.11.4) with ESMTP id fB3NNfm32380

for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 18:23:42 -0500 (EST)

(envelope-from mkscott@sacadia.com)

Received: from sacadia.com (localhost [127.0.0.1])

by dendrite.sacadia.com (8.10.2+Sun/8.10.2) with ESMTP id fB3NKiK16816

for <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>; Mon, 3 Dec 2001 15:20:44 -0800 (PST)

Message-ID: <3C0C08CC.917CC04B@sacadia.com>

Date: Mon, 03 Dec 2001 15:20:44 -0800

From: mkscott@sacadia.com

X-Mailer: Mozilla 4.78 [en] (X11; U; SunOS 5.8 sun4u)

X-Accept-Language: en

MIME-Version: 1.0

To: PostgreSQL Hackers Mailing List <pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org>

Subject: [HACKERS] Using Threads (again)

Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii

Content-Transfer-Encoding: 7bit

Precedence: bulk

Sender: pgsql-hackers-owner@postgresql.org

Status: OR

Hi All,

Since I last posted to this list I have done some work

on a multi-threaded port of Postgres 7.0.2 that I have been kicking

around for a while. There has been some mild interest

in this in the past so I thought I might try and start a sourceforge

project with what I have so far.

>From past discussions, it is clear to me that a direct port

of postgres which uses threads instead of processes is not a

good idea, how about an embedded version that uses threads.

A multi-threaded postgres might be good for that.

The version I am working on is slower in terms of transaction

throughput than the current postgres but it uses less system

resources and does not require shared memory.

I know it is possible to embed the current postgres but I

believe that is a single user system.

Comments?

Myron Scott

mkscott@sacadia.com

---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------

TIP 3: if posting/reading through Usenet, please send an appropriate

subscribe-nomail command to majordomo@postgresql.org so that your

message can get through to the mailing list cleanly