On Mon, May 9, 2011 at 7:07 PM, Tatsuo Ishii <[email protected]> wrote:
> >> You mean connection to backend? Yes, anytime child re-open the > >> connection automatically if neccessary (and possible). It's a > >> transparent processing for clients. > >> > >> > > In that case, and still with the objective of minimizing the memory > > footprint, does this seem like a good compromise: > > > > child_life_time = 1800 > > connection_life_time = 300 > > > > If the server is idle, the child will exit / respawn after 30 min, but > after > > 5 min it will drop the connection to the backend, meaning that an idle > child > > would only be connected to the backend 1/6th of the time. Is that > correct? > > Yes, correct. > > > Do you see any potential issues with such a setup? > > If a client keeps on connecting to pgpool-II, the above settings will > not work since they are only activated after the client disconnects to > pgpool-II. If you want to force idle clients be disconnected, you > could turn on this: > > # If client_idle_limit is n (n > 0), the client is forced to be > # disconnected whenever after n seconds idle (even inside an explicit > # transactions!) > # 0 means no disconnect. > client_idle_limit = 0 > > What is considered idle? I guess the "even inside an explicit transaction" scares me, as "inside a transaction" doesn't seem "idle". Thanks ED
_______________________________________________ Pgpool-general mailing list [email protected] http://pgfoundry.org/mailman/listinfo/pgpool-general
