| From: | Josh Berkus <josh(at)agliodbs(dot)com> |
|---|---|
| To: | pgsql-performance(at)postgresql(dot)org |
| Cc: | "Peter Darley" <pdarley(at)kinesis-cem(dot)com>, Ragnar Hafstað <gnari(at)simnet(dot)is>, "Tatsuo Ishii" <t-ishii(at)sra(dot)co(dot)jp> |
| Subject: | Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL |
| Date: | 2005-01-25 16:58:37 |
| Message-ID: | 200501250858.37157.josh@agliodbs.com |
| Views: | Raw Message | Whole Thread | Download mbox | Resend email |
| Thread: | |
| Lists: | pgsql-performance |
Peter, Ragnar,
> > Are there ones that you use which might use several different connections
> > to send a series of queries from a single web-user, less than 5 seconds
> > apart?
>
> Using Apache/Perl I often have a situation where we're sending several
> queries from the same user (web client) within seconds, or even
> simultaneously, that use different connections.
So from the sound of it, the connection methods I've been using are the
exception rather than the rule. Darn, it worked well for us. :-(
What this would point to is NOT being able to use Slony-I for database server
pooling for most web applications. Yes? Users should look to pgCluster and
C-JDBC instead.
BTW, Tatsuo, what's the code relationship between pgPool and pgCluster, if
any?
--Josh
--
Josh Berkus
Aglio Database Solutions
San Francisco
| From | Date | Subject | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Next Message | Christopher Kings-Lynne | 2005-01-25 17:52:28 | Re: 200 times slower then MSSQL?? |
| Previous Message | Peter Darley | 2005-01-25 16:49:58 | Re: PgPool changes WAS: PostgreSQL clustering VS MySQL |