Tom Lane wrote:
Gaetano Mendola <[EMAIL PROTECTED]> writes:
now that Apache Portable Runtime was release why don't use it on Postgres?
The sense of the question is backwards. Why *should* we use it?
In order to avoid all the annoyance that someone else had in write code portable. I mean, how much time ( I'm not a postgres developer, I like to think, for lack of time ) was spent in order to port postgres to win32 ? Don't you think that use of APR could save time ?
Andrew: about the green cheese, why not remake the moon with it if this have some benefit ?
Marc: you are not obliged to change APR version each eye blink. Don't you think that use a portable library could save time ?
One example for all: actually postgres is multi process, some time I see my server with 3 CPU in holiday and one overloaded to sort thousand rows. Don't you think in some cases spawn a couple of thread could improve it ? Let me dream that you agree on this and may be in years someone start to do it ( I'm using postgres since when "create or replace function" or "table functions" was a blasphemy so I'm sure that will happen). What are you going to do? Reinvent the hell and create a sort of framework to work with thread dealing with Win32 world ? I don't know if APR provide a spin lock mechanism, tell me how many times did you see discussion here on hackers about on how make the spin lock effective? In my experience I'm a C++ developer and each time I have to do something I full rely on STL, BOOST, XALAN, XERCES and may be I'll use the APR now that seem stable enough and I swear each time my colleagues are reinventing the list, queue, thread interactions....
Regards Gaetano Mendola
---------------------------(end of broadcast)--------------------------- TIP 4: Don't 'kill -9' the postmaster
