Doug McNaught wrote:
>"Wynn, Robin" <RWynn@northropgrumman.com> writes:
>
>
>
>AFAIK it's extremely bad practice in general to share a connection
>between two threads, unless you protect it with some kind of lock to
>avoid simultaneous use. Using a connection per thread is a much
>better idea. The only issue with that is that one thread won't see
>results of an in-progress transaction until the other thread commits.
>
>
I agree with you on seperate connections, and as for the multiple
threads seeing
the latest values of data or data sets, ... no new problem has been
added, its just
that now the source of the data object(s) are a TCP connectiion away,
instead of a
RAM memory controller (or mem manager) away....
>-Doug
>
>---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
>TIP 5: Have you checked our extensive FAQ?
>
>http://www.postgresql.org/users-lounge/docs/faq.html
>
>