Re: Function to kill backend
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Function to kill backend |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200404061148.28751.josh@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Function to kill backend (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: Function to kill backend
Re: Function to kill backend |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce, > Someone already posted some pseudocode where they wanted to kill idle > backends, perhaps as part of connection pooling. I'm not talking about code. I'm talking about a *reason*. i.e.: "I'm administrator of the blah-blah project. We had a lot of trouble managing idle connections to PG because of blah-blah. A function to kill off idle connctions would really help us becuase blah-blah-blah." So far, all we've heard in favor of SIGTERM-by-PID are *hypothetical* cases. Now Tom's telling us that there is a real cost attached to having this feature. Before we do it anyway, I want to be convinced that someone really needs it. It is *not* our practice to add features "just because we can." Otherwise, I'll stick by my assertion that idle connection management should be done in the middleware and NOT by psql. -- -Josh BerkusAglio Database SolutionsSan Francisco
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: