freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org
Subject: FreeTDS Development Group
List archive
- From: "James K. Lowden" <jklowden AT freetds.org>
- To: FreeTDS Development Group <freetds AT lists.ibiblio.org>
- Subject: Re: [freetds] Fw: FreeTDS vs Threads
- Date: Fri, 29 Jun 2007 14:19:23 -0400
Nick Kew wrote:
> > There's no relationship between server-side resources -- temporary
> > tables, transactions, cursors, etc. -- and client-side threads. The
> > db-lib thread restriction derives from the fact that db-lib maintains
> > connection state information at the process level: there is one
> > connection per process, and that connection's state is kept in the
> > process's DBPROCESS structure.
>
> "The process's DBPROCESS structure"?
>
> Are you saying we cannot have more than one DBPROCESS per process?
Eh, no, sorry. Per server process, per spid.
That is, each server process (connection) has one DBPROCESS. The client
and server are tightly coupled; the client tracks the server's state in
the DBPROCESS structure. Threads that would share a DBPROCESS must appear
to the server as a single, unified, handsome, protocol-abiding client.
Otherwise the client, and perhaps the server, will become deeply unhappy
and the chef may come after you with a cleaver.
--jkl
-
[freetds] Fw: FreeTDS vs Threads,
Nick Kew, 06/29/2007
-
Re: [freetds] Fw: FreeTDS vs Threads,
James K. Lowden, 06/29/2007
-
Re: [freetds] Fw: FreeTDS vs Threads,
Nick Kew, 06/29/2007
- Re: [freetds] Fw: FreeTDS vs Threads, James K. Lowden, 06/29/2007
-
Re: [freetds] Fw: FreeTDS vs Threads,
Nick Kew, 06/29/2007
-
Re: [freetds] Fw: FreeTDS vs Threads,
James K. Lowden, 06/29/2007
Archive powered by MHonArc 2.6.24.