Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering
От | Josh Berkus |
---|---|
Тема | Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 200501240952.40183.josh@agliodbs.com обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL clustering (Tatsuo Ishii <t-ishii@sra.co.jp>) |
Ответы |
Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL
|
Список | pgsql-performance |
Tatsuo, > > Depends on your connection pooling software, I suppose. Most connection > > pooling software only returns connections to the pool after a user has > > been inactive for some period ... generally more than 3 seconds. So > > connection continuity could be trusted. > > Not sure what you mean by "most connection pooling software", but I'm > sure that pgpool behaves differently. Ah, clarity problem here. I'm talking about connection pooling tools from the client (webserver) side, such as Apache::DBI, PHP's pg_pconnect, Jakarta's connection pools, etc. Not pooling on the database server side, which is what pgPool provides. Most of these tools allocate a database connection to an HTTP/middleware client, and only release it after a specific period of inactivity. This means that you *could* count on "web-user==connection" for purposes of switching back and forth to the master -- as long as the connection-recycling timeout were set higher than the pgPool switch-off period. -- Josh Berkus Aglio Database Solutions San Francisco
В списке pgsql-performance по дате отправления: