Re: Separate connection handling from backends

On 12/6/16 10:34 PM, Craig Ringer wrote:
> In other words, we could start to separate session state from executor
> state in a limited manner. That'd definitely be valuable, IMO; it's a
> real shame that Pg's architecture so closely couples the two.
>
> So - is just doing "PgInCoreBouncer" a good idea? No, I don't think
> so. But there are potentially good things to be done in the area.

Right.

> What I don't see here is a patch, or a vague proposal for a patch, so
> I'm not sure how this can go past the hot-air stage.

Yeah, I brought it up because I think there's potential tie-in with 
other things that have been discussed (notably async transactions, but 
maybe BG workers and parallel query could benefit too). Maybe it would 
make sense as part of one of those efforts.

Though, this is something that's asked about often enough that it'd 
probably be possible to round up a few companies to fund it.
-- 
Jim Nasby, Data Architect, Blue Treble Consulting, Austin TX
Experts in Analytics, Data Architecture and PostgreSQL
Data in Trouble? Get it in Treble! http://BlueTreble.com
855-TREBLE2 (855-873-2532)