Hi,

Denis Gasparin wrote:
Why not to implement a connection pooling server side as apache for
example does?

This has certainly been discussed before.

IIRC the real argument against that was, that fork() isn't the most expensive thing to do anymore. And Postgres does lots of other stuff after accept(), namely connecting to a certain database, authenticating the user, etc..

If you still want to optimize that, you'd end up having n spare backends *per database*. I do that in Postgres-R - not for connection pooling, but for application of remote transactions.

Regards

Markus


---------------------------(end of broadcast)---------------------------
TIP 4: Have you searched our list archives?

              http://archives.postgresql.org/

Reply via email to