Re: Connection pooling.
От | Alfred Perlstein |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Connection pooling. |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20000711222239.X25571@fw.wintelcom.net обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Connection pooling. (Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
* Chris Bitmead <chrisb@nimrod.itg.telstra.com.au> [000711 20:53] wrote: > > Seems a lot trickier than you think. A backend can only be running > one transaction at a time, so you'd have to keep track of which backends > are in the middle of a transaction. I can imagine race conditions here. > And backends can have contexts that are set by various clients using > SET and friends. Then you'd have to worry about authentication each > time. And you'd have to have algorithms for cleaning up old processes > and/or dead processes. It all really sounds a bit hard. The backends can simply inform the postmaster when they are ready either because they are done with a connection or because they have just closed a transaction. All the state (auth/temp tables) can be held in the system tables. It's complicated, but no where on the order of something like a new storage manager. -Alfred
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: