Re: Millisecond-precision connect_timeout for libpq
От | Tom Lane |
---|---|
Тема | Re: Millisecond-precision connect_timeout for libpq |
Дата | |
Msg-id | 26529.1373055898@sss.pgh.pa.us обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: Millisecond-precision connect_timeout for libpq ("Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com>) |
Список | pgsql-hackers |
"Joshua D. Drake" <jd@commandprompt.com> writes: > On 7/5/2013 1:01 PM, Josh Berkus wrote: >> This is one of the reasons why we've discussed having a kind of >> stripped-down version of pgbouncer built into Postgres as a connection >> manager. If it weren't valuable to be able to relocate pgbouncer to >> other hosts, I'd still say that was a good idea. > No kidding. I think a lot of -hackers forget that the web rules here and > the web is stateless, which means a huge performance loss for postgresql > unless we add yet another piece of software. Pre-forking here would > really help us. Pre-forking, per se, wouldn't be that much help IMO. You really want to connect to a backend that's already loaded its catalog caches etc. So a connection pooler is the right solution, not least because you can get it today. Whether we should integrate a pooler into core is more of a project management issue than a technical one, I think. regards, tom lane
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: