Re: Pre-forking backend

> Tom Lane wrote:
> > Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes:
> > > How hard would it be to pre-fork an extra backend
> >
> > How are you going to pass the connection socket to an already-forked
> > child process?  AFAIK there's no remotely portable way ...
> 
>     One  of  the mechanisms I've seen was that the master process
>     just does the socket(), bind(), listen(), than forks off  and
>     the  children  coordinate via a semaphore that at most one of
>     them executes a blocking accept(). I think  it  was  in  some
>     older apache release.
> 
>     But  in  contrast  to  apache,  we  currently  do most of the
>     initialization after we authenticated the user and know  what
>     database to connect to.  I'm not sure how much of the backend
>     startup could be done before accepting the connection.

I agree this may not be a big win on most platforms, but for platforms
like Solaris and NT, it could be a big win.  Added to TODO:
* Do listen() in postmaster and accept() in pre-forked backend

--  Bruce Momjian                        |  http://candle.pha.pa.us pgman@candle.pha.pa.us               |  (610)
853-3000+  If your life is a hard drive,     |  830 Blythe Avenue +  Christ can be your backup.        |  Drexel Hill,
Pennsylvania19026