Re: Multithread Query Planner

Ok, thanks.

Att,

Fred

2012/1/24 Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com>

> On Tue, Jan 24, 2012 at 11:25 AM, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> wrote:
> > Robert Haas <robertmhaas(at)gmail(dot)com> writes:
> >> I doubt it. Almost nothing in the backend is thread-safe. You can't
> >> acquire a heavyweight lock, a lightweight lock, or a spinlock. You
> >> can't do anything that might elog() or ereport(). None of those
> >> things are reentrant.
> >
> > Not to mention palloc, another extremely fundamental and non-reentrant
> > subsystem.
> >
> > Possibly we could work on making all that stuff re-entrant, but it would
> > be a huge amount of work for a distant and uncertain payoff.
>
> Right. I think it makes more sense to try to get parallelism working
> first with the infrastructure we have. Converting to use threading,
> if we ever do it at all, should be something we view as a later
> performance optimization. But I suspect we won't want to do it
> anyway; I think there will be easier ways to get where we want to be.
>
> --
> Robert Haas
> EnterpriseDB: http://www.enterprisedb.com
> The Enterprise PostgreSQL Company
>