Re: idle connection timeout ...
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: idle connection timeout ... |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 23263.1035558168@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: idle connection timeout ... (Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us>) |
Ответы |
Re: idle connection timeout ...
Re: idle connection timeout ... Re: idle connection timeout ... |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
Bruce Momjian <pgman@candle.pha.pa.us> writes: >> Well, there are two different things here. I agree that if an app >> is going to use persistent connections, it should be the app's >> responsibility to manage them. But a per-database, as opposed to >> installation-wide, limit on number of connections seems like a >> reasonable idea. Note that the limit would result in new connections >> being rejected, not old ones being summarily cut. > But then the app is going to keep trying to connect over and over unless > it knows something about why it can't connect. So? If it hits the installation-wide limit, you'll have the same problem; and at that point the (presumably runaway) app would have sucked up all the connections, denying service to other apps using other databases. I think Marc's point here is to limit his exposure to misbehavior of any one client app, in a database server that is serving multiple clients using multiple databases. It occurs to me that a per-user connection limit is going to be the next thing he asks for ;-). We could implement that too, if we wanted. (Not sure whether PGPROC stores the user id, but it easily could.) regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: