Re: Connection Pooling, a year later

From: Bruce Momjian <pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Don Baccus <dhogaza(at)pacifier(dot)com>
Cc: Christopher Kings-Lynne <chriskl(at)familyhealth(dot)com(dot)au>, mlw <markw(at)mohawksoft(dot)com>, owensmk(at)earthlink(dot)net, pgsql-hackers(at)postgresql(dot)org, Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
Subject: Re: Connection Pooling, a year later
Date: 2001-12-18 21:03:30
Message-ID: 200112182103.fBIL3Ut08641@candle.pha.pa.us
Views: Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-hackers

> I suspect that major applications that support multiple RDBMS's take a
> somewhat similar approach. In the context of providing an abstract
> database API for one's client code, adding persistent connection pooling
> seems pretty minor.

Yes, with that abstraction layer, it is quite easy.

--
Bruce Momjian | http://candle.pha.pa.us
pgman(at)candle(dot)pha(dot)pa(dot)us | (610) 853-3000
+ If your life is a hard drive, | 830 Blythe Avenue
+ Christ can be your backup. | Drexel Hill, Pennsylvania 19026

In response to

Browse pgsql-hackers by date

  From Date Subject
Next Message Hannu Krosing 2001-12-18 21:28:07 Re: Concerns about this release
Previous Message Bruce Momjian 2001-12-18 21:02:22 Re: Concerns about this release