Josh Berkus writes:
>> I'm also relying on the unsubstantiated assumption that it's
>> possible to pass a socket connection between processes.
> Doesn't pgpool do this?
No, and in fact that's exactly why the proposed implementation isn't
ever going to be in core: it's not possible to do it porta
Right, let's not confuse Kevin's argument that we should have
connection pooling in core with advocacy for any particular patch or
feature suggestion that he may have offered on some other thread. A
very simple in-core connection pooler might look something like this:
when a session terminates,
Jesper Krogh wrote:
I dont think a build-in connection-poller (or similiar) would in any
way limit the actions and abillities of an external one?
Two problems to recognize. First is that building something in has the
potential to significantly limit use and therefore advancement of work
on e
