| From: | Robert Treat <xzilla(at)users(dot)sourceforge(dot)net> |
|---|---|
| To: | pg(at)fastcrypt(dot)com |
| Cc: | Paul Thomas <paul(at)tmsl(dot)demon(dot)co(dot)uk>, Shridhar Daithankar <shridhar_daithankar(at)myrealbox(dot)com>, "pgsql-general (at) " "postgresql (dot) org" <pgsql-general(at)postgresql(dot)org> |
| Subject: | Re: MySQL Gets Functions in Java - Enlightenment Please |
| Date: | 2003-12-22 15:39:30 |
| Message-ID: | 1072107570.1966.23.camel@camel |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-general |
On Sat, 2003-12-20 at 13:04, Dave Cramer wrote:
> Is it more desirable to have a single java vm and communicate via RPC,
> or some other mechanism? ie sockets, or ? The alternative is to
> instantiate a java vm for every connection, this could be onerous as
> there would be considerable overhead for each java vm.
>
If you fire up the jvm at connection creation time rather than at first
pljava function call, wouldn't that make things much simpler and faster
per process? I only ask because I'm thinking most people using pljava
should have some kind of connection pooling going on where initial
connection creation overhead is significantly minimized...
Robert Treat
--
Build A Brighter Lamp :: Linux Apache {middleware} PostgreSQL
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | scott.marlowe | 2003-12-22 15:40:50 | Re: Salvage older PostgreSQL data disk - help? |
| Previous Message | Dave Cramer | 2003-12-22 15:07:33 | Re: MySQL Gets Functions in Java - Enlightenment Please |