On 16 Oct 2002 at 1:25, Bruce Momjian wrote: > Anuradha Ratnaweera wrote: > > Thanks, Bruce. But 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? > > (as they did with Apache). Are there any plans to do so, or is postgres > > going to remain rather a multi-process application? > 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. > I am also not sure if it is a big win on Apache either; I think the
Well, I have done some stress testing on 1.3.26 and 2.0.39. Under same hardware and network setup and same test case, 1.3.26 maxed at 475-500 requests/sec and 2.0.39 gave flat 800 requests/sec. Yes, under light load, there is hardly any difference. But Apache2 series is definitely an improvement. > jury is still out on that one, hence the slow adoption of 2.X, and we > don't want to add threads and make a mess of the code or slow it down, > which does often happen. Well, slow adoption rate is attributed to 'apache 1.3.x is good enough for us' syndrome, as far as I can see from news. Once linux distros start shipping with apache 2.x series *only*, the upgrade cycle will start rolling, I guess. Bye Shridhar -- Programming Department: Mistakes made while you wait. ---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
