From: | Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> |
---|---|
To: | Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> |
Cc: | "Joshua D(dot) Drake" <jd(at)commandprompt(dot)com>, pgsql-hackers <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
Subject: | Re: How ugly would this be? (ALTER DATABASE) |
Date: | 2014-10-25 03:19:04 |
Message-ID: | CA+TgmoaUyh=mt0N_8kFptQ8xofY+RFQm34wWpL45Hh__irn60Q@mail.gmail.com |
Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
Thread: | |
Lists: | pgsql-hackers |
On Fri, Oct 24, 2014 at 7:37 PM, Jim Nasby <Jim(dot)Nasby(at)bluetreble(dot)com> wrote:
> ISTM that the multiple-databases-per-backend issue is the huge hang-up here.
> Maybe there's some way that could be hacked around if you're just
> re-jiggering a bunch of catalog stuff (assuming you lock users out of both
> databases while you're doing that), but if you were going to go to that
> extent perhaps it'd be better to just support cross-database access in a
> single backend...
Good luck with that. It's probably as hard or harder than making the
backend multi-threaded, which is itself harder than any project a
reasonable person will undertake any time in the forseeable future.
--
Robert Haas
EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
From | Date | Subject | |
---|---|---|---|
Next Message | Ali Akbar | 2014-10-25 03:29:59 | Re: Function array_agg(array) |
Previous Message | Brightwell, Adam | 2014-10-25 02:26:23 | Re: security barrier INSERT |