Re: [GENERAL] fork() bad
От | Herouth Maoz |
---|---|
Тема | Re: [GENERAL] fork() bad |
Дата | |
Msg-id | l03110707b31c1917e44d@[147.233.148.111] обсуждение исходный текст |
Ответ на | Re: [GENERAL] fork() bad (Richi Plana <richip@mozcom.com>) |
Ответы |
Re: [GENERAL] fork() bad
|
Список | pgsql-general |
At 17:48 +0200 on 22/03/1999, Richi Plana wrote: > As some of you may know, I'm hacking Ascend RADIUS 2.01 to look up a > PostgreSQL database for authentication and log to PG for accounting. > Normally, RADIUS fork()s once for Accounting and fork()s for each > Authentication request. That's a lot of fork()ing and establishing > connections to the backend. It's slow, but it's better than junking > whatever code I've written so far. > > If anyone can give a better suggestion, I'm all ears. Also, if anyone > wants the code when it's done, try asking. ;^) Why don't you try to synchronize access to the connection between the various processes? You know, lock it in an exclusive lock, on an inter-process basis, such that when one process accesses it, the others have to wait. Or you can have a few connections open, so that the bottleneck is wider. You know, like you would treat any shared object in an inter-process environment? Herouth -- Herouth Maoz, Internet developer. Open University of Israel - Telem project http://telem.openu.ac.il/~herutma
В списке pgsql-general по дате отправления: