On 11 June 2013 01:45, Tatsuo Ishii <is...@postgresql.org> wrote: >> On Sat, Jun 8, 2013 at 5:04 AM, Simon Riggs <si...@2ndquadrant.com> wrote: >> >>> On 7 June 2013 20:23, Tom Lane <t...@sss.pgh.pa.us> wrote: >>> >>> > As for other databases, I suspect that ones that have parallel execution >>> > are probably doing it with a thread model not a process model. >>> >>> Separate processes are more common because it covers the general case >>> where query execution is spread across multiple nodes. Threads don't >>> work across nodes and parallel queries predate (working) threading >>> models. >>> >> Indeed. Parallelism based on processes would be more convenient for >> master-master >> type of applications. Even if no master-master feature is implemented >> directly in core, >> at least a parallelism infrastructure based on processes could be used for >> this purpose. > > As long as "true" synchronous replication is not implemented in core, > I am not sure there's a value for parallel execution spreading across > multile nodes because of the delay of data update propagation.
Please explain what you mean by the word "true" used here. -- Simon Riggs http://www.2ndQuadrant.com/ PostgreSQL Development, 24x7 Support, Training & Services -- Sent via pgsql-hackers mailing list (pgsql-hackers@postgresql.org) To make changes to your subscription: http://www.postgresql.org/mailpref/pgsql-hackers
