Re: Connection pooling.

From: Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net>
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Chris Bitmead <chrisb(at)nimrod(dot)itg(dot)telstra(dot)com(dot)au>, pgsql-hackers(at)hub(dot)org
Subject: Re: Connection pooling.
Date: 2000-07-12 07:09:47
Message-ID: 20000712000947.D25571@fw.wintelcom.net
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

* Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> [000712 00:04] wrote:
> Alfred Perlstein <bright(at)wintelcom(dot)net> writes:
> > * Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us> [000711 22:53] wrote:
> >> The killer problem here is that you can't hand off a connection
> >> accepted by the postmaster to a backend except by fork() --- at least
> >> not with methods that work on a wide variety of Unixen.
>
> > The code has been around since 4.2BSD, it takes a bit of #ifdef to
> > get it right on all systems but it's not impossible, have a look at
> > http://www.fhttpd.org/ for a web server that does this in a portable
> > fashion.
>
> I looked at this to see if it would teach me something I didn't know.
> It doesn't. It depends on sendmsg() which is a BSD-ism and not very
> portable.

It's also specified by Posix.1g if that means anything.

-Alfred

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Mike Mascari 2000-07-12 07:16:32 Re: 7.0.2 issues / Geocrawler
Previous Message Tom Lane 2000-07-12 07:04:13 Re: Connection pooling.