Re: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority
| От | Haribabu Kommi |
|---|---|
| Тема | Re: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority |
| Дата | |
| Msg-id | CAJrrPGecQvj90Y0UKH=wQkQnQP_vsTq1qBfc7uLyuRXNoo2keA@mail.gmail.com обсуждение исходный текст |
| Ответ на | Re: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority (Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com>) |
| Ответы |
Re: Libpq support to connect to standby server as priority
|
| Список | pgsql-hackers |
On Wed, Jul 11, 2018 at 6:00 PM Haribabu Kommi <kommi.haribabu@gmail.com> wrote:
On Wed, Jul 4, 2018 at 11:14 PM Laurenz Albe <laurenz.albe@cybertec.at> wrote:Haribabu Kommi wrote:
- I think the construction with "read_write_host_index" makes the code even more
complicated than it already is.
What about keeping the first successful connection open and storing it in a
variable if we are in "prefer-read" mode.
If we get the read-only connection we desire, close that cached connection,
otherwise use it.Even if we add a variable to cache the connection, I don't think the logic of checkingthe next host for the read-only host logic may not change, but the extra connectionrequest to the read-write host again will be removed.
I evaluated your suggestion of caching the connection and reuse it when there is no
read only server doesn't find, but I am thinking that it will add more complexity and also
the connection to the other servers delays, the cached connection may be closed by
the server also because of timeout.
I feel the extra time during connection may be fine, if user is preferring the prefer-read
mode, instead of adding more complexity in handling the cached connection?
comments?
Regards,
Haribabu Kommi
Fujitsu Australia
В списке pgsql-hackers по дате отправления: