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

Re: limiting connections per user/database

From: Tom Lane <tgl(at)sss(dot)pgh(dot)pa(dot)us>
To: Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com>
Cc: Petr Jelínek <pjmodos(at)parba(dot)cz>,pgsql-patches(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: Re: limiting connections per user/database
Date: 2005-06-27 05:42:00
Message-ID: 27883.1119850920@sss.pgh.pa.us (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-patches
Neil Conway <neilc(at)samurai(dot)com> writes:
> Tom Lane wrote:
>> I looked at this but did not actually see the code path that requires
>> forcing creation of the per-DB entry right at this spot.  The HASH_FIND
>> calls for this hashtable seem to all happen on the backend side not the
>> collector side.  Can you explain why we need this?

> Yeah, I missed this when making the original change (this code is rather 
> opaque :-\).

No kidding.  Somebody ought to separate the collector-side code from the
backend-side code sometime.

> BTW, the comment at line 2210 of pgstat.c is misleading: the n_backends 
> in the entries of the dbentry hash table are explicitly ignored when 
> reading in the stats file -- the value is instead derived from the 
> number of beentries that are seen.

Right.  So do we care whether the collector has the right number?
Or should we push the responsibility for tracking that count over
to the collector (+1 for that personally)?

			regards, tom lane

In response to

Responses

pgsql-patches by date

Next:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2005-06-27 05:59:49
Subject: Re: limiting connections per user/database
Previous:From: Neil ConwayDate: 2005-06-27 05:16:46
Subject: Re: limiting connections per user/database

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