Re: Separate connection handling from backends
От | David Fetter |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Separate connection handling from backends |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 20161205201402.GA3816@fetter.org обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Separate connection handling from backends (Jim Nasby <Jim.Nasby@BlueTreble.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: Separate connection handling from backends
|
Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Mon, Dec 05, 2016 at 01:48:03PM -0600, Jim Nasby wrote: > max_connections is a frequent point of contention between users and > developers. Users want to set it high so they don't have to deal with Yet > More Software (pgpool or pgBouncer); PG developers freak out because > backends are pretty heavyweight, there's some very hot code that's sensitive > to the size of ProcArray, lock contention, etc. > > One solution to this would be to segregate connection handling from actual > backends, somewhere along the lines of separating the main loop from the > switch() that handles libpq commands. Benefits: [interesting stuff elided] What do you see as the relationship between this proposal and the earlier one for admission control? https://www.postgresql.org/message-id/4B38C1C5020000250002D9A5@gw.wicourts.gov Best, David. -- David Fetter <david(at)fetter(dot)org> http://fetter.org/ Phone: +1 415 235 3778 AIM: dfetter666 Yahoo!: dfetter Skype: davidfetter XMPP: david(dot)fetter(at)gmail(dot)com Remember to vote! Consider donating to Postgres: http://www.postgresql.org/about/donate
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: