Skip site navigation (1) Skip section navigation (2)

Re: Pre-forking backend

From: sean-pgsql-hackers(at)chittenden(dot)org
To: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Cc: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>, PostgreSQL-development <pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org>
Subject: Re: Pre-forking backend
Date: 2001-09-30 02:28:01
Message-ID: 20010929192801.C46126@rand.tgd.net (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers
> Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us> writes:
> > How hard would it be to pre-fork an extra backend
> 
> How are you going to pass the connection socket to an already-forked
> child process?  AFAIK there's no remotely portable way ...

Umm... Apache?  They use a preforking model and it works quite well for 
every *NIX that Apache runs on.  ;)  Maybe RSE can comment on this 
further... -sc

-- 
Sean Chittenden

In response to

Responses

pgsql-hackers by date

Next:From: Justin CliftDate: 2001-09-30 02:31:20
Subject: Re: Spinlock performance improvement proposal
Previous:From: Lincoln YeohDate: 2001-09-30 01:54:44
Subject: Re: Pre-forking backend

Privacy Policy | About PostgreSQL
Copyright © 1996-2014 The PostgreSQL Global Development Group