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

RE: Connection Pooling...(Repost)...please do help..

From: "Clark, Joel" <jclark(at)lendingtree(dot)com>
To: "'Joseph Shraibman'" <jks(at)selectacast(dot)net>
Cc: "'sk(at)pobox(dot)com'" <sk(at)pobox(dot)com>, pgsql-interfaces(at)postgresql(dot)org
Subject: RE: Connection Pooling...(Repost)...please do help..
Date: 2000-12-19 13:44:18
Message-ID: 69F195289743D411B428009027E293C40267105F@CLTEXCH1 (view raw or flat)
Thread:
Lists: pgsql-interfaces
Yes, but the load of 200 concurrent fork()ed backends might be worse.  :)

jc

-----Original Message-----
From: Joseph Shraibman [mailto:jks(at)selectacast(dot)net]
Subject: Re: [INTERFACES] Connection Pooling...(Repost)...please do
help..

"Clark, Joel" wrote:
> 
> I haven't found PG to have much connection overhead, why would
open/closing
> a connection-per-query require server side connection pooling? 

Each connection causes the backend to fork.  With a heavy load you'll
feel the overhead of creating and closing so many connections.


-- 
Joseph Shraibman
jks(at)selectacast(dot)net
Increase signal to noise ratio.  http://www.targabot.com

pgsql-interfaces by date

Next:From: Alexaki SofiaDate: 2000-12-19 14:51:45
Subject: Shared Memory: out of memory
Previous:From: Dave PageDate: 2000-12-19 13:21:03
Subject: RE: version numbers of WinODBC

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